New TW Playtest Format - Check out our new review of the Wilson Pro Staff Six.One 95 v14!
- Thread starter TW Staff
- Start date
gino
Legend
Seconded all of the above
konstantinos kalfountzos
Hall of Fame
Having recently played the Wilson BLX Six.One 95 18x20, I'd make sure to whom this racket is oriented and just add that on one hand it's not a viable option for intermediate to make a full switch to it, since it's quite heavy and demands long takeback and big swings, but on the other hand, it's one of those rackets you can have fun with hitting for 30 minutes, especially slicing and hitting flat and through.
dr. godmode
Hall of Fame
Highly enjoyable. Constant cuts hold my attentional really well while keeping it easy to follow!
lidoazndiabloboi
Hall of Fame
Agree with @Seth. Using categories is much better than somewhat-disconnected individual streams of consciousness.
That said, I think you could improve some things even more by doing the following:
Perhaps you might even reach out to @ACT for ideas, collaboration, etc.
In summary, excellent job, and I know what I am asking above takes more time and resources, which may be seen, at least in part, as a diminishing point of return, but hopefully it gives some more ideas, if nothing else.
Thanks for all your work and providing such a great place to shop, and forum inside of which to discuss!
That said, I think you could improve some things even more by doing the following:
- In YouTube Studio, chapterize your categories into video sections, with corresponding timestamp links included in the video description.
- De-group and individualize your categories, each with its own chapter; to keep the video brief enough, include only the best / most relevant play tester input (not every tester needs to feature in every category):
- Intro & Specs
- Playability
- Power
- Control
- Spin
- Feel
- Maneuverability
- Stability
- Forgiveness
- Strokes
- Serve
- Ground (Forehand/Backhand)
- Volleys
- Who Is This Racquet For?
- Conclusion
- Make more objective and measurable comparisons to related racquets that you sell, in each of the above categories, to give your audience a better relative understanding of how the racquet performs.
(As a retailer, I understand you can't necessarily "favor" or negate any products in comparison to one another, but I think you can still offer more by just focusing on specific behavioral qualities alone)
Perhaps you might even reach out to @ACT for ideas, collaboration, etc.
In summary, excellent job, and I know what I am asking above takes more time and resources, which may be seen, at least in part, as a diminishing point of return, but hopefully it gives some more ideas, if nothing else.
Thanks for all your work and providing such a great place to shop, and forum inside of which to discuss!
Vicious49
Legend
I'd stick with the older format although the new one isn't that bad. I just found all the jumping around distracting.
The bigger deal is when you guys change around the written reviews. 95% of them are written in the standard format but there have been a few that you guys have done a different way. I hate reading those.
The bigger deal is when you guys change around the written reviews. 95% of them are written in the standard format but there have been a few that you guys have done a different way. I hate reading those.
Icsa
Professional
Very informative content provided in this video. I appreciate the effort to innovate and experiment with new presentation formats. However, I found the transitions between segments to be somewhat abrupt, which impacted the flow of information delivery. The rapid pace resulted in a viewing experience that was a bit challenging to follow. I felt a bit dizzy in the end.
I prefer the previous format. Nonetheless, thank you for engaging with the community to enhance the overall playtest delivery.
I prefer the previous format. Nonetheless, thank you for engaging with the community to enhance the overall playtest delivery.
Last edited:
VanDerVaart23
Semi-Pro
I liked the format. Somehow I paid more attention and it didn't feel like an 8 min video
Power Player
Bionic Poster
Great format guys. I loved that you dedicated a whole section of it to Feel. That's typically a hard thing to describe and it was interesting to hear how everyone described it. That was a pretty quick 8 minutes, so job well done.
TennisHound
Legend
Not to sound cliche, but it was reallly good. I like a lot better. I like seeing the match while you talking about the racquet. If I had a knock, it was a little on the positive side. All in all, I think you’ve hit the nail on the head.
StringStrungStrang
Professional
Hey TW Staff - Good job!
This new format is great if you want a more in depth review. The previous format works better when you just want a quick look at some info.
Both well done and professional as expected !!!
FlaredButt
Rookie
format is an upgrade for sure! this content is what separates you all from every other tennis retailer so it makes sense to continue to invest in it. two thumbs up
classical_tennis
New User
They need to make 16x18. Much more suited to the modern game. This was the go to racket 10-15 years ago for challengers, college men, 5.0+ players. Why not the more open string pattern considering the smallish head size?
classical_tennis
New User
classical_tennis
New User
ADHD inducing video, difficult to dicipher the information. Like each playtester's opinion in completion.
Organized Comments: The new format organizes comments into categories, which allows us to hear the opinion of each playtester on specific topics. This structure is very helpful and makes the video more informative.
Engaging Cuts: The constant cuts hold my attention well while keeping it easy to follow! This pacing makes the video more dynamic and engaging.
Spec Differences Section: I liked the spec differences from the previous model section. Including this would provide valuable context and help viewers compare the equipment more easily to the outgoing model.
Concise Length: The video felt like it was less than 8 minutes, which is a bonus. Keeping the video concise ensures that it is digestible and maintains viewer interest throughout.
Best regards,
shadow10
Engaging Cuts: The constant cuts hold my attention well while keeping it easy to follow! This pacing makes the video more dynamic and engaging.
Spec Differences Section: I liked the spec differences from the previous model section. Including this would provide valuable context and help viewers compare the equipment more easily to the outgoing model.
Concise Length: The video felt like it was less than 8 minutes, which is a bonus. Keeping the video concise ensures that it is digestible and maintains viewer interest throughout.
Best regards,
shadow10
Fed Kennedy
Legend
Same question
Also: stoked on the new format, feels more personal and engaging
Last edited:
dandruffkb
Rookie
Love the new format with clearly stated categories and it being much more engaging in terms of cuts and visuals.
Visuals are more straight-forward as well, but I think towards the end when the visuals show what strings were used, maybe string tension of the different play testers might help? Maybe play-testers can have some sort of "profile" on how they categorize themselves like rating if they hit flatter/spinnier or better fh/bh just for the sake of fun (topspin-ify a profile of the playtesters at tw, but that's just for entertainment sake, maybe not if the viewers become too critical lol).
Visuals are more straight-forward as well, but I think towards the end when the visuals show what strings were used, maybe string tension of the different play testers might help? Maybe play-testers can have some sort of "profile" on how they categorize themselves like rating if they hit flatter/spinnier or better fh/bh just for the sake of fun (topspin-ify a profile of the playtesters at tw, but that's just for entertainment sake, maybe not if the viewers become too critical lol).
Cowboy
Semi-Pro
I'm torn on the new format. On one hand, it's much more modern. Seems to follow the trend of constant screen changes, which is really engaging. On the flip side, with the constant cuts, it definitely feels more geared toward someone with a shorter attention span.
So, in short, both are good....new and old. I think I preferred the old just a bit, but that won't stop me from watching them. I think it looks good overall. (How's that for non-committal?)
So, in short, both are good....new and old. I think I preferred the old just a bit, but that won't stop me from watching them. I think it looks good overall. (How's that for non-committal?)
dandruffkb
Rookie
I'm part of what I'm about to say... but the attention span of a LOT of viewers has gone significantly down... I probably can't sit through many reviews without skipping around to what I'm looking for.
The new format is much more engaging. I like it. And the location is beautiful. Please do all of them there.
Would also like to hear!
bigserving
Hall of Fame
Thumbs up to the format. It makes the entire video interesting, entertaining, and very easy to watch. It is also cool to hear the immediate differences of opinion in each category.
Might be nice to hear opinions on sweet-spot size.
Perhaps, in the future, you will be able to find a nicer court to do the playtests!
Might be nice to hear opinions on sweet-spot size.
Perhaps, in the future, you will be able to find a nicer court to do the playtests!
Last edited:
Fxanimator1
Hall of Fame
I liked this format. It felt more organized, informative and also more entertaining.
@TW: will the racket be available at TWE?
I could not order from Netherlands, is there a way to order this Nica racket anyway for me?
If anybody knows or is able to help me, please send me a message, much appreciated!
Last edited:
I found the information difficult to absorb with all the cutting between playtesters. You lose the easy listening flow that comes from a single person providing a coherent review.
I much prefer the old format, but if you keep this one, I suggest inserting a summary card at the end of each section that bullets out the common points made by the playtesters. Then perhaps a final summary card.
I much prefer the old format, but if you keep this one, I suggest inserting a summary card at the end of each section that bullets out the common points made by the playtesters. Then perhaps a final summary card.
AmericanTwist
Hall of Fame
Nice video, nice testimonials lol...Since there are a variety of skill levels among your reviewers I suggest having someone feed the balls for every stroke: forehands, backhands, inside out/inside in, cross court, down the line, volleys, lobs, defensive shots, overheads and finally some video of everyone serving different kinds of serves. Maybe without music during this segment. Music is fine for testimonials, however.
I would also keep the specs up for longer so viewers can actually see and understand what they are. Flashing them for 3 or 4 seconds is not long enough.
Third suggestion: delve into different strings, maybe hit with them to see how balls fly among different string materials.
Fourth suggestion: compare specs with previous frames more in-depth. I see you tried to do that in the last minute but it was too little. We all know that manufacturers put out different specs every few years. It is good to get commentary on previous frames.
Ok that is all...oh except last comment. Nice background view of the ocean!
I would also keep the specs up for longer so viewers can actually see and understand what they are. Flashing them for 3 or 4 seconds is not long enough.
Third suggestion: delve into different strings, maybe hit with them to see how balls fly among different string materials.
Fourth suggestion: compare specs with previous frames more in-depth. I see you tried to do that in the last minute but it was too little. We all know that manufacturers put out different specs every few years. It is good to get commentary on previous frames.
Ok that is all...oh except last comment. Nice background view of the ocean!
mn_chilly
Rookie
Definitely feels like that if you hit the sweet spot (or close around it). Scary solid.
