Is it time for racquet companies to sell their magical pro stocks to the retail public?

a12345

Semi-Pro
So, now that you confirmed that you haven't been saying what I pointed at all along, you can go back and re-read what I and others were talking about.

Plenty to pay attention to.

:cool:
Eh?

The debate is about pro stocks vs retail rackets. Are pro stocks better or special compared to retail rackets.

If weve already established that the difference between a pro stock and a retail racket is simply where its sold, then how can you continue to say pro stocks are special and better than retail rackets?

What if they were to release that pro stock for general sale in retail shops, does it cease to be special simply because youve changed not the racket composition but the sales channel?
 

Harry_Wild

G.O.A.T.
Okay, just pay more and get the racquet that you want at one of the Pro Stock online stores. They will make it from scratch if you pre-order and are will to pay the $1.5+K per racquet. In that way, you get a brand new player racquet.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
Eh?

The debate is about pro stocks vs retail rackets. Are pro stocks better or special compared to retail rackets.

If weve already established that the difference between a pro stock and a retail racket is simply where its sold, then how can you continue to say pro stocks are special and better than retail rackets?

What if they were to release that pro stock for general sale in retail shops, does it cease to be special simply because youve changed not the racket composition but the sales channel?
The debate is whether the pro stock raquets are special (see the thread title for a reminder on that).

Your contention was that they are as special as the retail raquets they supposedly come from, i.e. nothing more than retail raquet that had been modified at best.

Then we went on to define how we distinguish a pro raquet, and a couple of paths for a raquet to end up as pro stock were discussed.

Generally we found out that it can happen in the following scenarios:

1) retail raquet that has been discontinued, and the company makes it only for its sponsored pros

2) company makes it from the same mold as a known retail frame, but with different layup, materials and QC

3) company makes it as a completely custom frame that has never been offered to the general customer

Throughout that discussion you made a number of statements, many of which were directly refuted (like that Babolat doesn't make custom frames for its pros, that a certain frame cannot be distinguished by other retail frame modded to different specs, etc., etc), and with some you disagreed with, contrary to the general opinion, and personal experience of many posters here (like for example claiming that if two frames come from the same mold, they are similar, despite of having different playing characteristics).

Later on you modified that statement by just saying that, since it is the same mold, the raquets are a modification of each other, just tweaked to have different characteristics, which honestly is a WTF inducing statement, because, if they have different characteristics, then how are they not different raquets (in nature)?

Here you went as far as to claim that modifying a retail raquet with external customisations is the same level of difference as having raquets made from the same mold, but with different layup, materials and QC.

While it was becoming exceedingly clear that you are doing it, because there was no other way that you keep your claim that the pro stocks with different layup are still retail raquets (since they share a mold with existing retail raquets), you lost completely any credibility as far as real world facts and experience are concerned, because those "tweaks" change the way a raquet plays on a fundamental level that cannot be altered by external modifications.

I made the remark about you not making any sense as far as putting all differences under one roof, and challenged you to explain to me why, if all differences are the same (according to you), no pro uses a Walmart raquet?

You tried to allude to the needs of a pro after which you didn't respond to the question why all pros have a certain group of needs that put some raquets out of their options.

Your question in your second paragraph shows that you don't read what the others write, but instead like to listen to your own voice: if you did read what the others write you would have noticed several things:

As already mentioned in the three options about how a raquet can end up as a pro stock, not only we haven't agreed that the difference between how we distinguish between a pro stock and a retail frame is whether it is sold to the public or not (like I said, that is a fortunate coincidence from a faulty logic), but it has been demonstrated with examples that

A) the distinction doesn't run as a juxtaposition of a pro stock and a retail, but it runs in the lines of whether a frame possesses characteristics that the pros look for or not

B) some pro stocks were never intended to be sold to the general consumer, which makes the criteria you use to distinguish both groups of raquets useless

Your third paragraph shows the same as the second: that would be the case with the RF 97.

Indeed, the distinction between a pro stock and retail (if one insists to stick to that juxtaposition, although it was already shown to be incorrect, as it inherently accentuates distribution channels (based on the nature of the grouping of the group "retail" frames) rather than raquet properties), in this case is accessibility, and in that case the focus shifts from the characteristics of the frame to its accessibility.

Here is a clarification of a fact that I feel you still haven't managed to grasp: there is a duality to the term "retail".

It can mean "a distribution channel", and it can mean "a group of items designed for the general public".

Obviously RF 97 has been developed with the pro that will use it in mind, so it is NOT an item designed for the general public.

It is the business decision that made it "retail", but making it "retail" as in "making it available for sale" doesn't alter its pro stock characteristics.

Is this particular retail frame representative for the general association between the retail and pro stock?

IMO, the answer is "absolutely not", as its main characteristics as a raquet doesn't suit the general public that has access to it, as many experiences in the real world confirm.

Is it special?

"Absolutely yes", and not because of the fact that it is Federer's frame, but because it possesses characteristics that many/most other frames will not have.

Is it more special than an oversized middle-of-the-road raquets to an amateur with a low to middle level of skill?

No, quite the opposite.

Is it special to the pro Roger Federer?

Absolutely yes, as he worked with Wilson to get exactly those characteristics in that frame, which means that it is the only one/one of the very few, that can help his particular game.

He cannot get those characteristics from any other frame in the Wilson lineup, otherwise they wouldn't have gone to the pains to develop it for him, if they had a ready solution in the form of a retail frame that can be customised.

Does that mean that it's special to the general public: yes, as long as they know (and eventually can look for) those playing characteristics, meaning that for those who can make use of those the raquet is special (which would be the answer of the question in the OP).

That example doesn't treat another problem that started this here discussion, which is: regardless of how they came to be pro stocks, some of the current pro stocks are the only representatives of a breed of raquets that provide a unique feel when playing with them. There are no retail raquets with the same feel or combination of characteristics, so whether they started as "retail" or not is irrelevant.

Which finally brings me back to repeat that it is not the distinction between retail and pro stock that is important, but the qualities of the raquets that are discussed in such threads.

:cool:
 
Last edited:

a12345

Semi-Pro
So a special racket is whatever you deem is special.

And a special racket can be pro stock or retail. This therefore makes discussing pro stock vs retail irrelevant, so what are you arguing about.

It means by your definition any racket can be special (subjectively) making a distinction between pro stock and retail redundant and a waste of time.

Is the AeroPure Drive 2005 special? Is Roddicks 2012 Pure Drive Special? Is the Head Pro Tour 630 special? Is the RF97 special? Is the Wilson Six.One Special? Agassi Bumblebee? Pro Staff 85? (All retail rackets)

If any racket can be special it means there is nothing inherently different between a pro stock and retail. So you may as well throw the terms pro stock and retail out the window then because they fall under the same category - they are just rackets , of which some have characteristics that are preferred over others.

Hence there is no inherent difference between pro stock and retail rackets, (except where they are sold), which ive been trying to tell you over and over again.
 
Last edited:

A_Instead

Hall of Fame
I had a few rackets done by **** that were made to the exact spec of a current WTA player...by request....paid a pretty penny for them...but now I know the receipe and adapt most of my rackets to that spec..when possible..
The cool thing is it's under 12 oz...I can hit well with it..and it hits the ball very well..
Amazing what a little weight added here and there and some shock reducing material does to a stock racket...
 

Federerkblade

Hall of Fame
There is no way Novak makes his running backhand defense shots with a retail speed . It just hasn't got the solid repsonse to do it ...
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
So a special racket is whatever you deem is special.

And a special racket can be pro stock or retail. This therefore makes discussing pro stock vs retail irrelevant, so what are you arguing about.

It means by your definition any racket can be special (subjectively) making a distinction between pro stock and retail redundant and a waste of time.

Is the AeroPure Drive 2005 special? Is Roddicks 2012 Pure Drive Special? Is the Head Pro Tour 630 special? Is the RF97 special? Is the Wilson Six.One Special? Agassi Bumblebee? Pro Staff 85? (All retail rackets)

If any racket can be special it means there is nothing inherently different between a pro stock and retail. So you may as well throw the terms pro stock and retail out the window then because they fall under the same category - they are just rackets , of which some have characteristics that are preferred over others.

Hence there is no inherent difference between pro stock and retail rackets, (except where they are sold), which ive been trying to tell you over and over again.
Come back when you learn to read.

Also, you can take your Walmart stick and flaunt it as a "pro stock", since it is retail.

:cool:
 

Londoner

New User
Doesnt head realize that if they started to sell djokers racquet almost untouched like wilson honorably did the rf97, people would buy it like crazy? As much as wilsons QC is apparently degenerate, they should be given praise for selling (close to) feds racquet.
Right, but why stop at almost untouched and (close to) and not just release the exact same frame?
 

XJ9

Rookie
I had a few rackets done by **** that were made to the exact spec of a current WTA player...by request....paid a pretty penny for them...but now I know the receipe and adapt most of my rackets to that spec..when possible..
The cool thing is it's under 12 oz...I can hit well with it..and it hits the ball very well..
Amazing what a little weight added here and there and some shock reducing material does to a stock racket...
are you going to share the receipe with us lol
 
Right, but why stop at almost untouched and (close to) and not just release the exact same frame?
It’s impossible with innate production variances, let alone Wilson’s horrendous QC. Plus, Fed and most other pros will make slight spec changes as the year goes on. They make a frame that is essentially a hairpin below his specs so that Fed/P1 can control the fine tuning based on his current preferences.

Another way to look at it is that Fed endorses the RF97 hairpin frame from Wilson. He gets his own handle put on and lead up top to get to his spec from the hairpin’s lower starting point. Obviously the average rec player doesn’t have their own handles so Wilson provides one for them. Wilson’s handle is made so that the racquet is playable in stock form.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Lindsay

Semi-Pro
I think the next frontier for manufacturers is custom from the factory production. Think Nike ID for tennis racquets. Custom weight, balance, flex, and most importantly, paint. People collect their favorite Nike shoes because they can customize in 10 colors. Players would do this with racquets. There are private companies that do this, but consumers don't know much about them and the companies don't have the ability to scale to the masses.

The problem with selling pro stock is that pro stock doesn't change. Lots of these guys are playing with 10-15 year old molds. So to keep recreational players buying more racquets, you have to make changes. The first racquet brand that lets buyers completely customize their racquets will win the market for the foreseeable future.
 

vsbabolat

G.O.A.T.
I think the next frontier for manufacturers is custom from the factory production. Think Nike ID for tennis racquets. Custom weight, balance, flex, and most importantly, paint. People collect their favorite Nike shoes because they can customize in 10 colors. Players would do this with racquets. There are private companies that do this, but consumers don't know much about them and the companies don't have the ability to scale to the masses.

The problem with selling pro stock is that pro stock doesn't change. Lots of these guys are playing with 10-15 year old molds. So to keep recreational players buying more racquets, you have to make changes. The first racquet brand that lets buyers completely customize their racquets will win the market for the foreseeable future.
I just want my HEAD PT57A at a reasonable price. I have zero interest in the companies latest marketing BS.
 

edelp

Rookie
I just want my HEAD PT57A at a reasonable price. I have zero interest in the companies latest marketing BS.
I agree. I mean if an Ultra Tour is possible, a re-launch of the OS Agassi (even though not the tk59), why not the PT630? If Head thinks the current prestige mp is too similar, then take pt630/pt57a and name it prestige MP. Just an example. Or take one of the radical (the new models are anyhow not on the level of the past imo) and leave the MP as it is and put under a nice Radical PRO PJ the pt57a (like murray has)
 

vsbabolat

G.O.A.T.
I agree. I mean if an Ultra Tour is possible, a re-launch of the OS Agassi (even though not the tk59), why not the PT630? If Head thinks the current prestige mp is too similar, then take pt630/pt57a and name it prestige MP. Just an example. Or take one of the radical (the new models are anyhow not on the level of the past imo) and leave the MP as it is and put under a nice Radical PRO PJ the pt57a (like murray has)
The problem with your idea is that it makes too much sense.
 

Christian Olsson

Professional
Donnay has racquets between 50-60 RA. They even have one that's modeled after the PT57A.
Wasn’t PT57 modelled after Agassis Donnay? Or am I in deep waters on this one?


Volkl Vsense 10 - 318sw 318 bal 334w
Volkl Super G 10 - 318sw 316 bal 335w

Sonic pro 17, will shortly try hybrids.
 

Kaznkul

Rookie
Still don’t know why there aren’t more retail racquets with a lower RA than is currently on the market? I own a RF97. I enjoy the heft but would like it more flexible. I’m confused why it’s not if supposedly Fed’s stick has more flex. My arm would be happier!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Djokovicfan

Semi-Pro
The debate is whether the pro stock raquets are special (see the thread title for a reminder on that).

Your contention was that they are as special as the retail raquets they supposedly come from, i.e. nothing more than retail raquet that had been modified at best.

Then we went on to define how we distinguish a pro raquet, and a couple of paths for a raquet to end up as pro stock were discussed.

Generally we found out that it can happen in the following scenarios:

1) retail raquet that has been discontinued, and the company makes it only for its sponsored pros

2) company makes it from the same mold as a known retail frame, but with different layup, materials and QC

3) company makes it as a completely custom frame that has never been offered to the general customer

Throughout that discussion you made a number of statements, many of which were directly refuted (like that Babolat doesn't make custom frames for its pros, that a certain frame cannot be distinguished by other retail frame modded to different specs, etc., etc), and with some you disagreed with, contrary to the general opinion, and personal experience of many posters here (like for example claiming that if two frames come from the same mold, they are similar, despite of having different playing characteristics).

Later on you modified that statement by just saying that, since it is the same mold, the raquets are a modification of each other, just tweaked to have different characteristics, which honestly is a WTF inducing statement, because, if they have different characteristics, then how are they not different raquets (in nature)?

Here you went as far as to claim that modifying a retail raquet with external customisations is the same level of difference as having raquets made from the same mold, but with different layup, materials and QC.

While it was becoming exceedingly clear that you are doing it, because there was no other way that you keep your claim that the pro stocks with different layup are still retail raquets (since they share a mold with existing retail raquets), you lost completely any credibility as far as real world facts and experience are concerned, because those "tweaks" change the way a raquet plays on a fundamental level that cannot be altered by external modifications.

I made the remark about you not making any sense as far as putting all differences under one roof, and challenged you to explain to me why, if all differences are the same (according to you), no pro uses a Walmart raquet?

You tried to allude to the needs of a pro after which you didn't respond to the question why all pros have a certain group of needs that put some raquets out of their options.

Your question in your second paragraph shows that you don't read what the others write, but instead like to listen to your own voice: if you did read what the others write you would have noticed several things:

As already mentioned in the three options about how a raquet can end up as a pro stock, not only we haven't agreed that the difference between how we distinguish between a pro stock and a retail frame is whether it is sold to the public or not (like I said, that is a fortunate coincidence from a faulty logic), but it has been demonstrated with examples that

A) the distinction doesn't run as a juxtaposition of a pro stock and a retail, but it runs in the lines of whether a frame possesses characteristics that the pros look for or not

B) some pro stocks were never intended to be sold to the general consumer, which makes the criteria you use to distinguish both groups of raquets useless

Your third paragraph shows the same as the second: that would be the case with the RF 97.

Indeed, the distinction between a pro stock and retail (if one insists to stick to that juxtaposition, although it was already shown to be incorrect, as it inherently accentuates distribution channels (based on the nature of the grouping of the group "retail" frames) rather than raquet properties), in this case is accessibility, and in that case the focus shifts from the characteristics of the frame to its accessibility.

Here is a clarification of a fact that I feel you still haven't managed to grasp: there is a duality to the term "retail".

It can mean "a distribution channel", and it can mean "a group of items designed for the general public".

Obviously RF 97 has been developed with the pro that will use it in mind, so it is NOT an item designed for the general public.

It is the business decision that made it "retail", but making it "retail" as in "making it available for sale" doesn't alter its pro stock characteristics.

Is this particular retail frame representative for the general association between the retail and pro stock?

IMO, the answer is "absolutely not", as its main characteristics as a raquet doesn't suit the general public that has access to it, as many experiences in the real world confirm.

Is it special?

"Absolutely yes", and not because of the fact that it is Federer's frame, but because it possesses characteristics that many/most other frames will not have.

Is it more special than an oversized middle-of-the-road raquets to an amateur with a low to middle level of skill?

No, quite the opposite.

Is it special to the pro Roger Federer?

Absolutely yes, as he worked with Wilson to get exactly those characteristics in that frame, which means that it is the only one/one of the very few, that can help his particular game.

He cannot get those characteristics from any other frame in the Wilson lineup, otherwise they wouldn't have gone to the pains to develop it for him, if they had a ready solution in the form of a retail frame that can be customised.

Does that mean that it's special to the general public: yes, as long as they know (and eventually can look for) those playing characteristics, meaning that for those who can make use of those the raquet is special (which would be the answer of the question in the OP).

That example doesn't treat another problem that started this here discussion, which is: regardless of how they came to be pro stocks, some of the current pro stocks are the only representatives of a breed of raquets that provide a unique feel when playing with them. There are no retail raquets with the same feel or combination of characteristics, so whether they started as "retail" or not is irrelevant.

Which finally brings me back to repeat that it is not the distinction between retail and pro stock that is important, but the qualities of the raquets that are discussed in such threads.

:cool:
Good post, but youd probly have more people read it if you made you paragraphs more streamlined.
 

Djokovicfan

Semi-Pro
Right, but why stop at almost untouched and (close to) and not just release the exact same frame?
I agree. I think the racquets should be sold as the exact Pt mold Novak uses and have a little pamphlet outlining lead placement customizations that he uses so the buyer can pimp it out to be the exact same stick. For head to not see how much excitement there is to be ignited in a customer who can play almost as well or just as well with his idols racquet makes them look like a pile of senile old corporate tools who drive their toyota prius home going 5 under the limit looking forward to their choice evening of drinking non-alcoholic beer while they watch "Cops" on tv so they feel better about their loser conformist lives.
 
Last edited:

Harry_Wild

G.O.A.T.
Just no demand even if the racquet manufacturers actually offered the “actual” pro stock frame such as a RF97 Autograph that Federer actually plays with with the lead tape in the 12 o’clock and silicone in the handle, leather grip, etc... How many players worldwide could actually hit with his racquet that are not college level players?
 
Last edited:

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
Just no demand even if the racquet manufacturers actually offered the “actual” pro stock frame such as a RF97 Autograph that Federer actually plays with with the lead tape in the 12 o’clock and silicone in the handle, leather grip, etc... How many players worldwide count actually hit with his racquet that are not college level players?
How many players worldwide are actually striving to be anything more than weekend hacks, considering that even the better ones realise that they will never be better than a good player at the local place?

The other day I was watching a junior girl that was about 14 (but already about 6 foot tall) that was absolutely destroying the ball in a manner most players at the local courts could never dream of.

Certainly, once they have witnessed that, it is no difficult to imagine what they think their place as players is.

:cool:
 

Harry_Wild

G.O.A.T.
How many players worldwide are actually striving to be anything more than weekend hacks, considering that even the better ones realise that they will never be better than a good player at the local place?

The other day I was watching a junior girl that was about 14 (but already about 6 foot tall) that was absolutely destroying the ball in a manner most players at the local courts could never dream of.

Certainly, once they have witnessed that, it is no difficult to imagine what they think their place as players is.

:cool:
This junior girl if she makes into the pro WTA top 100 will certainly get endorsements and will probably using the same tennis racquet she is using right now. If she is really good and is in the top 30, she will get a racquet endorsement too. Chances are she wii then be playing with a pro stock version of the racquet she is playing with now!
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
This junior girl if she makes into the pro WTA top 100 will certainly get endorsements and will probably using the same tennis racquet she is using right now. If she is really good and is in the top 30, she will get a racquet endorsement too. Chances are she wii then be playing with a pro stock version of the racquet she is playing with now!
You might be right, but that has little to do with why the biggest customer group chooses to play with a certain raquet, and that is what we were talking about.

It is association that drives most of the sales, once the players get past the illusion of grandeur.

Also, ironically, once the smaller group of players that can play on a higher level gets there, they are also more likely to make a good use of a pro stock raquet.

So it makes sense for both weekend hacks and advanced players to have that option.

Of course, I realise that there is also a fairly large group of low level players that are looking for easy-power or whatever, and also the group that is constantly looking to improve their game by buying yet another frame, but these things have all their place.

:cool:
 
Top