Next Generation of Pro Staff is Here; Pro Staff RF 97 Review

Is spin worth permanently damaging your elbow? I don't think so.

Connors won 109 ATP singles tournaments without any spin at all. :)

And Lendl won 94 ATP singles tournaments with hardly any spin at all. :shock:

different equipment, different time, can't compare that with now. Were Lendl and Connors playing guys who hit with spin or playing with guys who were using similar racquets with small head size.
 
I picked up a pair of these sticks last night. Was lucky enough to get first refusal of the first batch that the shop had as I had pre-ordered and was even more lucky to find a pair within half a gram of each other (340 & 339.5 respectively) and both 12 pts headlight unstrung.

Haven't had a chance to measure weight now that they've been strung (will do so when I get back tonight) but in terms of how they swing through the air they feel somewhere between my K6.1 95 (which has a leather grip and over grip) and my 90s . They don’t feel like they come through the air quite as quickly as the 90 but rather surprisingly and in my opinion, they felt a little quicker/whippier than the 95 – certainly no slower.

I’m hoping to get on court tonight so will see be able to verify if my initial assessments are correct and will look to share my own thoughts on this stick.
 
I think it ll depends on what one would define as "heavy shot". For me, "heavy" would mean the amount of pace AND spin in a shot. Someone who hits an 80 mph forehand with 2000 rpms of spin will hit "heavier" than someone who hits an 80 mph forehand with 100 rpms of spin. To this effect, I find it much easier to hit a heavier shot with the RF97 than with the 90. Pace and spin comes easier.



Uhmmmm, NO. Sorry, just, NO.

Yes, that is what I meant, Pace AND spin. I could definitely feel the increase in pace, but not the spin. Much harder to get spin with the same swing pattern. It may be as simple as I might have strung it too tight. Strung it at 57 (what was recommended) even though I string my 90 at 52#. I think I will try it at 52# next time because I didn't seem to get the ball pocketing that I do with the 90 at 52#.
 
Hi PeterFig, hopefully you see this post here.

I just wanted to say congratulations on the sweet deal with Wilson! I was holding out to comment on the paintjob until seeing it in person(to be honest, I prefer black), and am glad I did. It looks great in person! Great job!

It's great to hear about people's success stories :)

Thanks - nice to hear you're liking it!

I was at a play test this week where a bunch of people hit with all the various new Pro Staffs - it was nice to see a court full of these red hooped racquets being swung around - it really stands out nicely :) Of course I get that some people like an all black racquet ... and that's fair as design is much about personal preference and taste. We have the Blade already in a black cosmetic and with so many racquets out there I feel each racquet needs it's own identity and that's what we tried to do with the Pro Staff.

Outside of the cosmetic feedback, I'm actually even more excited to hear the feedback of those who have hit with the frame and have liked the way it plays.
 
Thanks - nice to hear you're liking it!

I was at a play test this week where a bunch of people hit with all the various new Pro Staffs - it was nice to see a court full of these red hooped racquets being swung around - it really stands out nicely :) Of course I get that some people like an all black racquet ... and that's fair as design is much about personal preference and taste. We have the Blade already in a black cosmetic and with so many racquets out there I feel each racquet needs it's own identity and that's what we tried to do with the Pro Staff.

Outside of the cosmetic feedback, I'm actually even more excited to hear the feedback of those who have hit with the frame and have liked the way it plays.

I strongly disagree with that. Pro Staffs of old have always been subtle. I don't see the necessity of a racquet to "stand out", that's what Babolats are for with their neons and s***.

Pro Staff Classic 6.1 didn't exactly "stand out" against the Pro Staff 6.0.
 
Last edited:
Thanks - nice to hear you're liking it!

I was at a play test this week where a bunch of people hit with all the various new Pro Staffs - it was nice to see a court full of these red hooped racquets being swung around - it really stands out nicely :) Of course I get that some people like an all black racquet ... and that's fair as design is much about personal preference and taste. We have the Blade already in a black cosmetic and with so many racquets out there I feel each racquet needs it's own identity and that's what we tried to do with the Pro Staff.

Outside of the cosmetic feedback, I'm actually even more excited to hear the feedback of those who have hit with the frame and have liked the way it plays.

Were you park of the group at the park hyatt is Carlsbad? They lent me some of the racquets and let me check out the new blades. I really like the new design on the blades. Not sure whether or not you did those. The prostaff is one of the nicest looking racquets I have ever used though:)
 
Were you park of the group at the park hyatt is Carlsbad? They lent me some of the racquets and let me check out the new blades. I really like the new design on the blades. Not sure whether or not you did those. The prostaff is one of the nicest looking racquets I have ever used though:)

Yes I was there in Carlsbad! Pretty nice place to hit some tennis balls. We had a great time and tried a lot of frames out.

I only had a little bit to do with the Blade design - just finished off the last 10-20% of an already existing base design.
 
Last edited:
I strongly disagree with that. Pro Staffs of old have always been subtle. I don't see the necessity of a racquet to "stand out", that's what Babolats are for with their neons and s***.

Pro Staff Classic 6.1 didn't exactly "stand out" against the Pro Staff 6.0.

"Stand out" doesn't mean neon and all that -- it means have it's own unique identity ... again design is subjective so I totally get that you would like a dark / classic design. This new Pro Staff - I think - is still classic in design, and very clean and simple in terms of execution - it just has the pop of red to give it both a tie into it's heritage, but also give it a unique feel.
 
I strongly disagree with that. Pro Staffs of old have always been subtle. I don't see the necessity of a racquet to "stand out", that's what Babolats are for with their neons and s***.

Pro Staff Classic 6.1 didn't exactly "stand out" against the Pro Staff 6.0.
Actually, it did, with it's psychedelic rainbow of colors compared to the all black of the PS 6.0.


IMG_6169.jpg
 
"Stand out" doesn't mean neon and all that -- it means have it's own unique identity ... again design is subjective so I totally get that you would like a dark / classic design. This new Pro Staff - I think - is still classic in design, and very clean and simple in terms of execution - it just has the pop of red to give it both a tie into it's heritage, but also give it a unique feel.
I don't think the RF97A's paintjob is bad at all. It's quite a cool looking paintjob. My only issue with it is that from a distance it looks a bit too much like the current Head Graphene Prestiges with the red hoop (cap grommet) and the black throat. And since Head came out with their paintjob first, it makes it seem as if Wilson was copying Head or just following the herd.

rs.php
 
Yeah I agree.

IMO, the Prestiges looked very good in person. I liked the PJ a lot.

But I love that psychedelic looking Pro Staff as well. You don't see subtle yet wild PJs any more like that.

Another great PJ that needs to be emulated more is the Donnay Borg. Just awesome.
 
Yes I was there in Carlsbad! Pretty nice place to hit some tennis balls. We had a great time and tried a lot of frames out.

I only had a little bit to do with the Blade design - just finished off the last 10-20% of an already existing base design.
i stopped by to drop off Chris's racquets last night, I may have met you. I met all the regional people in the lobby. The rep from australia was pretty funny. Are you still here? I would love to hit if you are.
 
i stopped by to drop off Chris's racquets last night, I may have met you. I met all the regional people in the lobby. The rep from australia was pretty funny. Are you still here? I would love to hit if you are.

I think we missed each other - I saw the reps in the lobby but had some other things to do so didn't stick around there. I did go out later in the evening with a bunch of people from the Chicago office and the Aussie rep came too - ya he's pretty cool, I only met him for the first time on this trip. I'm actually at the San Diego airport now heading back home.... would have been fun to have a hit. Next time :)
 
I think we missed each other - I saw the reps in the lobby but had some other things to do so didn't stick around there. I did go out later in the evening with a bunch of people from the Chicago office and the Aussie rep came too - ya he's pretty cool, I only met him for the first time on this trip. I'm actually at the San Diego airport now heading back home.... would have been fun to have a hit. Next time :)

Peter, have you hit with the new 95s?
 
Thanks for taking the time to write this great review. I'll make sure to link it to the first page of this thread.

Interesting that you found the 88 to feel flexier in feel. Perhaps it is due to your kps88's being broken in??

My pleasure. It's my first post and my first review, so I'm glad to hear that.

Maybe I'm using the wrong terminology. Its not that my 88's are flexier. In fact the RF97A had a lot more flex in the tip which helped when I was reaching for a return or passing shot. I think what I was trying to convey is that it felt very firm and that feeling of stiffness gave me a more jarring sensation in the arm during the two hours I played with it. I get that sense when I hit with the APD as well, but never with my trusted Pro Staffs.
 
Yesterday I had the opportunity to hit with the new RF97A and here's my best attempt at a review. Side note, the short version of how this came about is that one of the guys I play with regularly is very close friends with someone who has strong philanthropic ties to Federer and recently received the new racquet from the GOAT during a dinner the two had together in NYC. He then lent it to my hitting partner for a few days who in turn let me play with it when we hit yesterday.

Before I get too far into this, I think it’s worth mentioning that I currently play with the KFactor Pro Staff 88 (and have been since 2009). I did dabble a bit with the Blade 93 (stock form) and really liked it, but ultimately couldn't switch because what I gained in forehand racquet head speed, I lost in depth on my backhand, steadiness at the net and heaviness on my serve. I am in my early 30’s, I play more singles than doubles, although I enjoy both. I play a serve and volley style game. And I play USTA 4.5 in Nor Cal.

Anyway, back to the review. The racquet was strung up the way Fed supposedly has it - that's Natural Gut in the mains and Luxilon 4G in the crosses at 56/57lbs. After warming up with it, we played two sets over two hours and here’s what I thought.

Weight: Right away it felt good in the hands. I know that I play with a heavy racquet already, but I do not share TW reviewers' overwhelming view that the racquet is too heavy for the broader tennis playing public. Yes, it’s on the heavier side of the spectrum but anyone who was comfortable playing with previous iterations of the pro staff or 6.1's (which at one point was huge number of players) will not find this racquet overwhelming. The balance/swing weight result in a racquet that is much more maneuverable than my kfps88. With my kfps88, I am forced to get into position early and extend the length of my strokes on every shot. Hitting hard topspin forehands on the run (especially stretched out wide) are very hard with kfps88 because it’s difficult to maneuver. That is not the case with the RF97A. And as a result the access to spin is huge.

Spin: When hitting from the baseline you really get a sense that this racquet was built for Fed. If you emulate his shot style, hitting the forehand way out in front with a semi-western grip and following through across the body, thereby creating dramatic racquet head speed right before and at impact, then you will see truly splendid depth and power. The ball seems to catapult off the string bed and yet somehow there’s enough spin to bring it back to Earth just in time (most of the time). This style of forehand is not as easy to accomplish with the kfps88 - there’s no way to generate that sort of racquet head speed shot after shot because it’s just not as maneuverable as the RF97A. I also noticed that I could access more backspin with RF97A. I tend to approach behind a backhand slice cross court and when I did that with the RF97A, the ball stayed low and slid out a bit more dramatically than it does when I slice with my kfps88.

Power: One thing that I noticed right away is that the strings felt too lively for me. My kfps88’s are strung up with RPM Blast 18 gauge at 50lbs. Clearly to compensate for the increase in power from the larger hoop and frame of the RF97A, tension must be increased. Fed has supposedly increased his tension 8lbs or so. And if I were to string this racquet with the poly of my choice, I think I would also go up 5-6 lbs. That being said, Fed’s hybrid set up was too springy for me. I hit a number of balls that were 6-12 inches behind the baseline and I think that if I had a deader string set up (like all Poly) than I would have had a bit more control over the power.

Serve: The racquet is great on the serve. That’s where the weight helps but also the maneuverability is clutch. I was able to access some serious kick with the RF97A. I served balls that bounced much higher than they do when I use my kfps88 simply because it’s easier to maneuver the RF97A when coming over the top of ball. And that’s impressive because the grip size I typically use is 4 3/8 and the RF97A I played with was a 4 1/2 grip. That should have made it more difficult to flick, so I imagine with the smaller grip I could have generated even more kick. Crazy.

Volleys: This is what it’s all about. After playing with the racquet for two hours I am totally convinced that this racquet was built for Fed so that he could accomplish more at the net. While the power and spin may help his backhand a bit, I don’t think that he’s suddenly going to have better results against Nadal because he’ll be able to better withstand the barrage of high bouncing balls to his backhand. No. It isn’t a magic racquet. But the bigger head (and bigger sweet spot) make a huge difference up at the net. For those of you who come to net after you serve (not many of us anymore) than I’m sure you’ve had the experience of coming in on a powerful return. In that moment, it can be hard to hit the volley in the exact center of the sweet spot of your racquet. And 1-2 inches off center can make a huge difference in how dialed in your volley will be. Catching the ball a little too high in your string bed and the volley won’t have much depth or power, alternatively hitting too low in the string bed and you might see your volley fly long. If you’ve had this experience and you’re playing with a small sweet spot racquet like the kfps88, than you will notice right away that the RF97A is dramatically more forgiving at net. When your opponent strikes powerful and/or dipping passing shots, this racquets larger sweet spot increases your chances of hitting a good volley. Even if you’re off center by 1 or 2 inches the volley is still excellent. No exaggeration, this racquet is so amazing at the net that I could see myself getting one just for those games during doubles matches where my partner is serving. I know that sounds ridiculous but it really was awesome at net.

Conclussion: I think this racquet is going to be a great option for a lot of advanced players. If you’ve got the fundamentals down and have played with pro staff racquets in the past, this racquet will feel very evolutionary. It will provide you with a lot of the spin and power you’ve been on the receiving end of when hitting with friends who are using Babolat racquets, but not at the expense of the control you associate with pro staffs. I think this is because of the weight, but I don’t really know. Maybe it’s the PWS or balance or swing weight or a combination of all three. All I can assure you is that the power does not come at the expense of control. That said, there is a consequence, the racquet is stiff and less comfortable than I’m used to and that maybe the deal breaker for me. We shall see.

I hope you enjoyed the review and I hope you all get to hit with one soon.

Nice review Mike! I was on the Mountain View Rengstorff team a few years ago, when you beat Rajik K in 3 sets in singles. You, me, and Hank W. are the only 3 guys I’ve met in the 4.0/4.5 circles in Silicon Valley that use the kps88 regularly. The past year, I’ve been using my tour 90s more, but they don’t have the plowthru and spin of the kps88.

I will demo the RF97 shortly. I recently picked up a Pro Kennex ki5 PSE, another beast @13.1 with overgrip & dampener. It reminds me of a more forgiving 88, with a big sweetspot, but similar plowthru.
 
Got to try the RF97, PS97 and new PS95S. The demo rf97 was strung very tight. Way too tight and the frame felt very stiff at that tension. Way more stiff than expected. Think it must have just come down to the string being so tight since when tried the PS97 it felt much nicer. Still stiff feeling but no way as harsh. Can certainly feel the additional free power of these frames. The PS97 felt solid/stable enough at stock weights. Was actually more impressed with the 95s. Definitely softer feeling and muted. I had a regular ps95 before and this 95s in stock form felt much more stable and better power level. For the most part I felt like it didn't really need any modification. Don't know what specs these frames had, but I took to the 95s the most followed by the PS97. I can't say too much about the rf as it was way too harsh the way it was strung. Didn't feel too heavy, but can imagine may get taxing after a couple sets. With my preference for softer frames I may be getting the 95s.
 
Well I finally got to take this beauty out for a hit. Unfortunately, there was no honeymoon period. It's strung up with Pro's Pro Nano Vendetta at 56lbs. Please keep in mind that I am not that great of a player. I have decent groundstrokes and volleys, but a poor serve.

Weight: This racket did not feel very heavy just holding it. I play with a 374g Pro Staff 90, and 349g Pure Storm Tours. The RF97 comes out to 360g strung+overgrip. However, the RF definitely swings the heaviest out of the three. On groundstrokes, the racket is fine, just need to adjust timing. I was still able to whip it around on the run, but it took more effort, and I started feeling tired much earlier than with the other rackets.

Groundstrokes: On groundstrokes, it was pretty easy to get a bunch of spin on the shot. I generally hit flatter, so a smaller margin but with spin to get it into the court. Forehands and one-handed backhands were no problem. Slices with this feel just great. The feeling with slicing is sublime, almost as good as the P90 and much better than the PSTs.

Volleys: Oh my gosh, the best part of this racket. There was so much stability, and I was able to get the racket where I needed it. I could drive the ball back at the opponent's feet, or put it away with an angle with ease. It was very surprising how easily this racket could pick up topspin shots that dove at my feet.

Serve: Oh boy, this is where I had the most trouble with the racket. The concerns about getting tired fast will go away with time as I get used to it. I'm not so optimistic about the serves. For what it's worth, I can hit a decent topspin serve with either the PS90 or PSTs, with the latter taking less effort. I've never had a good flat serve, so that won't be discussed in this review. With the RF97 though, I could not get any serves in at all. It just felt like I couldn't accelerate the racket up through the hitting zone. All my balls would fly off in a fairly linear fashion and clip the bottom of the tape at the top of the net. This was very consistent and I may have had some technical issues that were not being addressed. For what it's worth, I was able to go back to the PST and serve fine with it. The only time I could get a serve in with the RF97 is if I threw myself into the court a lot more than usual. It was just surprising that I could serve with the 90 but not this.

All in all, it is a racket that is definitely worth trying if you have technically sound strokes. Otherwise, it'd be best to skip this. Groundstrokes and volleys were nice and crisp. I felt like I could do what I wanted to with the ball. However, the fatigue from the swingweight did come into play. Serves were difficult and I'll have to take it out again to see if it gets better. I do believe that I may need to string a bit lower to help on the serve.
 
I don't think the RF97A's paintjob is bad at all. It's quite a cool looking paintjob. My only issue with it is that from a distance it looks a bit too much like the current Head Graphene Prestiges with the red hoop (cap grommet) and the black throat. And since Head came out with their paintjob first, it makes it seem as if Wilson was copying Head or just following the herd.

rs.php

I think all recent Wilson racquet paintjobs look awful, except the Blades.
 
Well, I finally got my own 97 and strung it up differently than I did the demo. I strung the demo with VS Touch 16 Black on the mains and Tour Bite 18 on the crosses both at 57#. Strung my new rackets with the same string, but at 52#. What a difference. I can see why Fed dropped his tension from 59/56 to 54/52 for USO. Much better ball pocketing and control. Although if you are late on your swing it can still be a rocket launcher on the forehand.

Most of my comments will be to compare it to the PS 90 2014, which was also strung with the same string at 52#. I am a 4.5/5.0 player, former collegiate D-1 and nationally ranked junior, 59 years old, quit for 20 years (burned out) when I hit 30 and picked it up again at 50, mostly classic strokes and game. I have hit for 4 hours with this racket in total.

Forehand.. MUCH more power, not as much control as the 90. I definitely had to change my swing pattern on the forehand to add more topspin. The ball can sail if you get even a little bit late with this racket. I think as my swing pattern evolves to match the new racket this issue will go away. But you can really blast away on the 97 if you need power.

Backhand... One of the places this racket really shines. A lot more control and feel, most likely due to my swing pattern. A lot less shanking against heavy topspin or slice. Slice backhands are a dream, and very heavy. Defensive shots are much better because the racket does so much of the work compared to the 90. You have to back off the power to get the same depth on a topspin backhand. An easy swing works much better than an aggressive swing.

Volley... Another place the racket shines. Just touch the volley and it goes exactly where you want it to go. Touch volleys are a little tougher to pull off on the 97 compared to the 90, but aggressive volleys usually end up being winners or forced errors.

Serve.... Power, power, power.... Probably got at least 10 mph more with the same swing as I would with the 90. With the wider string pattern, I had to aim a little deeper on kickers or I would catch the tape a lot due to the extra spin the wider string pattern gives you. Flat bombs explode off the court. Slice serves are a little harder to control.

Return of serve... Another plus. Take a full swing at the returns and you will be rewarded. I didn't hook or shank near as many returns with the 97.

Final thoughts... This racket is totally different than the Pro Staffs of the past. It is a much more modern racket, and players with a more modern game will like it, although it is also perfect for classic S&V players. Classic baseliners (flat hitters) may struggle whereas modern aggressive baseliners will excel. If you are a pusher or junkballer don't bother. If you block the ball you will not have any control at all, probably due to the wider string pattern. The heavier weight may be an issue for those with TE, even though it is so head light. The weight will also tire your arm a little faster, but that will go away the more you play with the racket. I still don't have the "heavy" forehand that I had with the 90, but as I change my swing pattern I do believe that it will return.

Since Wilson is dropping the 90, everyone will have to make the decision on whether or not they want to make the slight adjustments to their swing patterns to make this racket work, especially on the forehand side. If you hit a flat forehand, you're going to hit a lot of long balls compared to the 90.
 
Last edited:
coloskier, thanks for providing your review. I added it to first page.

I think you'll find that when you get used to the frame, that heavy forehand will return. You may very well be already hitting it, but probably don't notice it, since the frame is already doing some of the work for you with the "free power" it provides compared to the 90.
 
Hey Drakulie!

Here's my mini side-by-side review of the RF97A vs my 16x19 H22:

Power: While the RF97A is a powerful racquet, I found it to be lower powered than my H22, but in a good way since I've been spraying less balls than my H22. Launch angle is a lot lower than my H22. I understand why a guy like Troy Lara who is a closed pattern user still likes the control of the RF97A despite it being an open pattern.

Control: I found better control in the RF97A than my H22, as explained above. As for directional control, I would give it a slight edge to the RF97A

Spin: Around the same. However, it was easier to accelerate the racquet head on the RF97A if I needed a heavier ball.

Maneuverability: FYI, my H22 spec'd out at around 11.8 oz 3.5 HL and my RF97A at around 12.6 oz 9.5 HL. Even with the RF97A's high static weight, I found it to feel faster than my H22 due to the very HL balance. However, for reflex volleys and lunging shots, I found it easier with my H22 (it's most probably due to me not fully dialed in yet since I only used it for 6 hours up to now and the balance & static weight are so different vs my H22).

Stability: Hands down the RF97A! It's a tank! When I setup properly to take a volley, I just put the racquet in front and it does the job! On my H22, due to substantial weight in the head, I still get the amazing stability but the RF97A does it better due to the higher static weight.

Comfort/Feel: The RF97A has a crisper feel to it while my H22 has a more dampened feel. In terms of the raw ball feel, the RF97A is a lot better. Due to the higher static weight of the RF97A, I found it to be better for the arm than my H22.

Serves: With my H22, power and spin are very easy to come by on serve. To me, my H22 is one of the best serving sticks I have ever used. With the RF97A, I have to work a little harder to get the same pace as my H22, but the spin is still very easy to come by. Since the RF97A's consistency and control are quite amazing on serve, I was still successfull at holding my service games.

Groundies: RF97A for sure since the control is a lot better than my H22. I found the depth control quite challenging at times with my H22 since it is so lively.

On a final note, for a racquet that has a substantial static weight like my RF97A, it plays surprisingly like a lighter racquet but with so much more plowthrough and arm protection, which is quite a delight! As for the paintjob, it looks much better in person! Kudos to TT's own PeterFig!
 
I will say that one hand topspin backhands with the RF97 are just amazing. I was getting way more spin than I did with the PS95S i had used previously. I also get more depth and power on my ground strokes compared to my Blade 93.
 
Last edited:
coloskier, thanks for providing your review. I added it to first page.

I think you'll find that when you get used to the frame, that heavy forehand will return. You may very well be already hitting it, but probably don't notice it, since the frame is already doing some of the work for you with the "free power" it provides compared to the 90.

Thanks Drak, I'll keep updating as I get used to the racket. The heavy ball is a comment from my regular practice partner (his daughter was ranked #7 in the USA in Girls 18 a few years ago), who is telling me the ball with the 97 is harder, but not near the topspin, and doesn't surprise him by jumping into him as much, so it is easier to return. Got rained out tonight, but will play tomorrow. I have my first match with this racket on Thursday. I figure I might as well go for it.
 
Hey Drakulie!

Here's my mini side-by-side review of the RF97A vs my 16x19 H22:

Power: While the RF97A is a powerful racquet, I found it to be lower powered than my H22, but in a good way since I've been spraying less balls than my H22. Launch angle is a lot lower than my H22. I understand why a guy like Troy Lara who is a closed pattern user still likes the control of the RF97A despite it being an open pattern.

Control: I found better control in the RF97A than my H22, as explained above. As for directional control, I would give it a slight edge to the RF97A

Spin: Around the same. However, it was easier to accelerate the racquet head on the RF97A if I needed a heavier ball.

Maneuverability: FYI, my H22 spec'd out at around 11.8 oz 3.5 HL and my RF97A at around 12.6 oz 9.5 HL. Even with the RF97A's high static weight, I found it to feel faster than my H22 due to the very HL balance. However, for reflex volleys and lunging shots, I found it easier with my H22 (it's most probably due to me not fully dialed in yet since I only used it for 6 hours up to now and the balance & static weight are so different vs my H22).

Stability: Hands down the RF97A! It's a tank! When I setup properly to take a volley, I just put the racquet in front and it does the job! On my H22, due to substantial weight in the head, I still get the amazing stability but the RF97A does it better due to the higher static weight.

Comfort/Feel: The RF97A has a crisper feel to it while my H22 has a more dampened feel. In terms of the raw ball feel, the RF97A is a lot better. Due to the higher static weight of the RF97A, I found it to be better for the arm than my H22.

Serves: With my H22, power and spin are very easy to come by on serve. To me, my H22 is one of the best serving sticks I have ever used. With the RF97A, I have to work a little harder to get the same pace as my H22, but the spin is still very easy to come by. Since the RF97A's consistency and control are quite amazing on serve, I was still successfull at holding my service games.

Groundies: RF97A for sure since the control is a lot better than my H22. I found the depth control quite challenging at times with my H22 since it is so lively.

On a final note, for a racquet that has a substantial static weight like my RF97A, it plays surprisingly like a lighter racquet but with so much more plowthrough and arm protection, which is quite a delight! As for the paintjob, it looks much better in person! Kudos to TT's own PeterFig!

Thanks for your review, especially for comparing your h22 to the RF97A. I agree the RF97A has a bit of a crisper feel than the H22, which is a bit more dampened. Not by much, but is a little bit crisper feeling. Although I feel they play extremely similar, with the RF being a bit more lively.

PS: I added your review to the first page. Thanks!!

Thanks Drak, I'll keep updating as I get used to the racket. The heavy ball is a comment from my regular practice partner (his daughter was ranked #7 in the USA in Girls 18 a few years ago), who is telling me the ball with the 97 is harder, but not near the topspin, and doesn't surprise him by jumping into him as much, so it is easier to return. Got rained out tonight, but will play tomorrow. I have my first match with this racket on Thursday. I figure I might as well go for it.

Thanks for update. In my case, my regular hitting partner has told me my shots are much livelier and penetrating off both wings. Good luck Thursday, and keep us updated.
 
I will say that one hand topspin backhands with the RF97 are just amazing. I was getting way more spin than I did with the PS95S i had used previously. I also get more depth and power on my ground strokes compared to my Blade 93.

Definitely agree that ground strokes are much more penetrating and easier to come by with the RF97A compared to the 93, and much easier to come by. I also added your review to first page. Thanks!!
 
I was able to hit with my RF97 for about an hour and a half today (with a set of doubles thrown in). I'm not sure if it was the strings (the Fed setup - gut/poly hybrid at 59/56) or the layup of the frame, but I was surprised at how lively it felt. I'm coming off a K95 so it's not like I'm new to the thicker beam and stiffer feel of the 6.1 line, but even for me, the ball seemed to be leaping off the stringbed. Serves and forehands (which I tend to hit flatter than most of my other shots) took some adjusting for that reason, and for a while I had to consciously remember to swing a bit harder to to impart as much spin as I needed.

Still, I REALLY enjoyed the frame overall. The stability and the massive sweet spot are just addicting - I was swinging harder at balls in general because I wasn't afraid of being punished for an off-center strike. I was also getting noticeably more spin on my groundstrokes, with the ball kicking up more than what I'm used to seeing. And for as much talk as there's been about it not feeling like a real Pro Staff, I found that balls hit flush felt GREAT. Maybe not the same as the old 6.0, but definitely better than the K95 I had been using (again, some of that might've been the fresh/good strings - I typically just string up my racquets with multis or synthetic guts).

Some people on these boards seem to be wondering what's going to happen to the 6.1 moving forward. I'll say that if you set aside nostalgia or some sort of loyalty to that particular line, you'll be quite pleased with the RF97 as a replacement. The swingweight felt almost identical and may have been even a bit lighter with the RF97 (although I did get one that was a bit under-spec at 11.9 unstrung). Very pleased!
 
I’ll post this review a couple places since folks seem to want to hear about this frame.

First some preliminaries for context: 4.5 senior, all court player here. Play a lot of senior tournaments. Home surface is har-tru but play hard court tournaments occasionally. Racket for the last year has been the K 6.1 95 16x18 with some lead at 3 and 9 to take it up to 12.4 total. 12 months previous to that was on the K90, no lead, 12.6 total static weight. So I like heavy, head light frames in the 340-345 SW zone. Also did a 3 week test with the Yonex Tour G 330 (Wawrinka) in June, really liked it but didn’t switch over.

First 3-4 hits the setup was a full bed of Alu Power 17g at 52. Last 3 hits the setup was Silverstring 17g mains @ 51, Gosen syn gut 18g crosses @ 55. Frame was 12.4 strung. Then I took the leather grip off and put on a Hydrosorb plus Tournagrip. That probably puts it back to 12.4 although I didn’t weigh it again.

I agree with a lot of the reviews so far that despite the specs, this stick is harder to pull through than the K90 or the 6.1 95 family. But there are benefits…

Sweet spot – definitely bigger than the 90 and noticeable. Slightly bigger than the 6.1 95. And the bigger sweetspot provides benefits in addition to feel. Seems like a very consistent sweet spot to me also.

Serves – serves very well if you have the strength to get it moving. Sweetspot helps on serves. Seems to kick the ball higher than the 95 or 90. When I caught it right, ballspeed was higher than my previous 2 Wilson’s and usually my opponent was late, error wide, hello free point. I’m reasonably strong but not strong like younger guys. For a strong 4.5 or up who has young man’s strength, I would think you would absolutely serve lights out with this frame; kickers, flat, slice, you name it. Plus the stronger guys could probably kick the ball very high off the serve, moreso than previous Wilson’s.

Forehand - for some reason, and I agree with most other reviewers, I was late on the FH occasionally and it would always sail long when late. I could always “flip” the 90 or 95 late, when I realized I was going to be late, and actually hit a very good, deep, spinny shot. You can’t be late with this one on the FH side. The frame seems to play at a higher SW than it’s specs. You definitely have to get it moving early. However, on the positive side, when I got time, planted the feet and was early, there was more ballspeed and spin on the crosscourt FH than the 90 or 95. Produced errors consistently when I hit my best FH. Also the more I adjust to this fame, I’m not late nearly as much. I won a bunch more points on crosscourt FHs than the predecessors.

Backhand – my default BHs are 1-hand slice and flat. I really don’t have a 1-hand topspin BH. But I might soon, seriously. For some reason this fame really drops into the slot and wants to crush a topspin BH. Flat and slice are very good though too. Overall I think this frame hits a heavier ball with a little more ballspeed than the 90 or 95, all other things being equal, which they never are. There is not as much a tendency to be late on the BH wing, but a hard, deep ball in the corner can get behind you where there’s too much weight to move to hit a defensive shot. But again I’m already adjusting to that. You have to be early. Again, I could always recover with the 90 or 95 by retreating and making a hard shoulder turn and producing a good, deep defensive ball to stay in a point. Can’t make that shot with this frame yet. It just doesn’t come through as fast despite the specs. But for someone who has a 5.0 level 1H topspin BH (I don’t), you gotta hit with this frame. You might be able to hit crosscourt BH winners at will.

Volleys – rock solid. Maybe slightly less maneuverable than the 90 or 95, need more time to tell. But when you have time and stick a volley, it ain’t coming back. Very good block return and volley frame. I play a lot of Dubs too and I think this will play Dubs just as well as my previous 2 Wilson’s. But for Dubs only guys, I don’t think this is the ticket. And here’s something very specific: when facing a fast serve, sometimes I don’t have enough time on the FH to get to SW grip and hit the topspin drive. With the RF97A I was able to hit the Conti FH slice deeper and harder than my other Wilson’s for sure. A nice option to have against big servers.

Bottom Line – this is definitely an all-court attacker’s stick imo. I’m already quickly adjusting to the shots I couldn’t hit initially. My limited match results are better so far, although it is early. Exactly what I was looking for. Maybe 2-4 more points won in a close set against a strong opponent, which changes the match result, if that holds true over time. I had one match for example where 5 BH approaches off short balls didn’t come back. Opponent netted all 5 passing shots due to heaviness of my ball. Normally I’d have to make 1-2 volleys to finish that type of point on har-tru. Priceless, if that holds true over time. I have 2 tournaments coming up, results don’t lie. That will give me the answer. But I’m trying to get ahold of a 2nd frame asap for sure.

You can really hurt an opponent with this stick. You can win a point or gain a big advantage with 1 good ball. I think the market for this frame is actually pretty limited. But for a 4.5 all-court player and above who is strong and already playing a heavy frame, say 12.2 or more, this might be your holy grail. Pure Drive and APD guys will not be switching to this one. But this is contra-Babolat that an all court player needs to beat the highly skilled players wielding a Babolat, who may not have as much variety in their game. That's a matchup I get a lot.

Another specific pattern I can attest to – you’re in a rally, you hit a deep, heavy forehand to the opponents BH. He floats the reply a little bit. You can decide to come in late with this stick with confidence and then crush that awkward first volley even from behind the service line, with total confidence. Point’s either over then or worst case, 1 more easy volley.
 
I’ll post this review a couple places since folks seem to want to hear about this frame.

First some preliminaries for context: 4.5 senior, all court player here. Play a lot of senior tournaments. Home surface is har-tru but play hard court tournaments occasionally. Racket for the last year has been the K 6.1 95 16x18 with some lead at 3 and 9 to take it up to 12.4 total. 12 months previous to that was on the K90, no lead, 12.6 total static weight. So I like heavy, head light frames in the 340-345 SW zone. Also did a 3 week test with the Yonex Tour G 330 (Wawrinka) in June, really liked it but didn’t switch over.

First 3-4 hits the setup was a full bed of Alu Power 17g at 52. Last 3 hits the setup was Silverstring 17g mains @ 51, Gosen syn gut 18g crosses @ 55. Frame was 12.4 strung. Then I took the leather grip off and put on a Hydrosorb plus Tournagrip. That probably puts it back to 12.4 although I didn’t weigh it again.

I agree with a lot of the reviews so far that despite the specs, this stick is harder to pull through than the K90 or the 6.1 95 family. But there are benefits…

Sweet spot – definitely bigger than the 90 and noticeable. Slightly bigger than the 6.1 95. And the bigger sweetspot provides benefits in addition to feel. Seems like a very consistent sweet spot to me also.

Serves – serves very well if you have the strength to get it moving. Sweetspot helps on serves. Seems to kick the ball higher than the 95 or 90. When I caught it right, ballspeed was higher than my previous 2 Wilson’s and usually my opponent was late, error wide, hello free point. I’m reasonably strong but not strong like younger guys. For a strong 4.5 or up who has young man’s strength, I would think you would absolutely serve lights out with this frame; kickers, flat, slice, you name it. Plus the stronger guys could probably kick the ball very high off the serve, moreso than previous Wilson’s.

Forehand - for some reason, and I agree with most other reviewers, I was late on the FH occasionally and it would always sail long when late. I could always “flip” the 90 or 95 late, when I realized I was going to be late, and actually hit a very good, deep, spinny shot. You can’t be late with this one on the FH side. The frame seems to play at a higher SW than it’s specs. You definitely have to get it moving early. However, on the positive side, when I got time, planted the feet and was early, there was more ballspeed and spin on the crosscourt FH than the 90 or 95. Produced errors consistently when I hit my best FH. Also the more I adjust to this fame, I’m not late nearly as much. I won a bunch more points on crosscourt FHs than the predecessors.

Backhand – my default BHs are 1-hand slice and flat. I really don’t have a 1-hand topspin BH. But I might soon, seriously. For some reason this fame really drops into the slot and wants to crush a topspin BH. Flat and slice are very good though too. Overall I think this frame hits a heavier ball with a little more ballspeed than the 90 or 95, all other things being equal, which they never are. There is not as much a tendency to be late on the BH wing, but a hard, deep ball in the corner can get behind you where there’s too much weight to move to hit a defensive shot. But again I’m already adjusting to that. You have to be early. Again, I could always recover with the 90 or 95 by retreating and making a hard shoulder turn and producing a good, deep defensive ball to stay in a point. Can’t make that shot with this frame yet. It just doesn’t come through as fast despite the specs. But for someone who has a 5.0 level 1H topspin BH (I don’t), you gotta hit with this frame. You might be able to hit crosscourt BH winners at will.

Volleys – rock solid. Maybe slightly less maneuverable than the 90 or 95, need more time to tell. But when you have time and stick a volley, it ain’t coming back. Very good block return and volley frame. I play a lot of Dubs too and I think this will play Dubs just as well as my previous 2 Wilson’s. But for Dubs only guys, I don’t think this is the ticket. And here’s something very specific: when facing a fast serve, sometimes I don’t have enough time on the FH to get to SW grip and hit the topspin drive. With the RF97A I was able to hit the Conti FH slice deeper and harder than my other Wilson’s for sure. A nice option to have against big servers.

Bottom Line – this is definitely an all-court attacker’s stick imo. I’m already quickly adjusting to the shots I couldn’t hit initially. My limited match results are better so far, although it is early. Exactly what I was looking for. Maybe 2-4 more points won in a close set against a strong opponent, which changes the match result, if that holds true over time. I had one match for example where 5 BH approaches off short balls didn’t come back. Opponent netted all 5 passing shots due to heaviness of my ball. Normally I’d have to make 1-2 volleys to finish that type of point on har-tru. Priceless, if that holds true over time. I have 2 tournaments coming up, results don’t lie. That will give me the answer. But I’m trying to get ahold of a 2nd frame asap for sure.

You can really hurt an opponent with this stick. You can win a point or gain a big advantage with 1 good ball. You can go from defense to offense quickly. I think the market for this frame is actually pretty limited. But for a 4.5 all-court player and above who is strong and already playing a heavy frame, say 12.2 or more, this might be your holy grail. Pure Drive and APD guys will not be switching to this one. But this is contra-Babolat that an all court player needs to beat the highly skilled players wielding a Babolat, who may not have as much variety in their game. That's a matchup I get a lot.

Another specific pattern I can attest to – you’re in a rally, you hit a deep, heavy forehand to the opponents BH. He floats the reply a little bit. You can decide to come in late with this stick with confidence and then crush that awkward first volley even from behind the service line, with total confidence. Point’s either over then or worst case, 1 more easy volley.
 
I’ll post this review a couple places since folks seem to want to hear about this frame.

First some preliminaries for context: 4.5 senior, all court player here. Play a lot of senior tournaments. Home surface is har-tru but play hard court tournaments occasionally. Racket for the last year has been the K 6.1 95 16x18 with some lead at 3 and 9 to take it up to 12.4 total. 12 months previous to that was on the K90, no lead, 12.6 total static weight. So I like heavy, head light frames in the 340-345 SW zone. Also did a 3 week test with the Yonex Tour G 330 (Wawrinka) in June, really liked it but didn’t switch over.

First 3-4 hits the setup was a full bed of Alu Power 17g at 52. Last 3 hits the setup was Silverstring 17g mains @ 51, Gosen syn gut 18g crosses @ 55. Frame was 12.4 strung. Then I took the leather grip off and put on a Hydrosorb plus Tournagrip. That probably puts it back to 12.4 although I didn’t weigh it again.

I agree with a lot of the reviews so far that despite the specs, this stick is harder to pull through than the K90 or the 6.1 95 family. But there are benefits…

Sweet spot – definitely bigger than the 90 and noticeable. Slightly bigger than the 6.1 95. And the bigger sweetspot provides benefits in addition to feel. Seems like a very consistent sweet spot to me also.

Serves – serves very well if you have the strength to get it moving. Sweetspot helps on serves. Seems to kick the ball higher than the 95 or 90. When I caught it right, ballspeed was higher than my previous 2 Wilson’s and usually my opponent was late, error wide, hello free point. I’m reasonably strong but not strong like younger guys. For a strong 4.5 or up who has young man’s strength, I would think you would absolutely serve lights out with this frame; kickers, flat, slice, you name it. Plus the stronger guys could probably kick the ball very high off the serve, moreso than previous Wilson’s.

Forehand - for some reason, and I agree with most other reviewers, I was late on the FH occasionally and it would always sail long when late. I could always “flip” the 90 or 95 late, when I realized I was going to be late, and actually hit a very good, deep, spinny shot. You can’t be late with this one on the FH side. The frame seems to play at a higher SW than it’s specs. You definitely have to get it moving early. However, on the positive side, when I got time, planted the feet and was early, there was more ballspeed and spin on the crosscourt FH than the 90 or 95. Produced errors consistently when I hit my best FH. Also the more I adjust to this fame, I’m not late nearly as much. I won a bunch more points on crosscourt FHs than the predecessors.

Backhand – my default BHs are 1-hand slice and flat. I really don’t have a 1-hand topspin BH. But I might soon, seriously. For some reason this fame really drops into the slot and wants to crush a topspin BH. Flat and slice are very good though too. Overall I think this frame hits a heavier ball with a little more ballspeed than the 90 or 95, all other things being equal, which they never are. There is not as much a tendency to be late on the BH wing, but a hard, deep ball in the corner can get behind you where there’s too much weight to move to hit a defensive shot. But again I’m already adjusting to that. You have to be early. Again, I could always recover with the 90 or 95 by retreating and making a hard shoulder turn and producing a good, deep defensive ball to stay in a point. Can’t make that shot with this frame yet. It just doesn’t come through as fast despite the specs. But for someone who has a 5.0 level 1H topspin BH (I don’t), you gotta hit with this frame. You might be able to hit crosscourt BH winners at will.

Volleys – rock solid. Maybe slightly less maneuverable than the 90 or 95, need more time to tell. But when you have time and stick a volley, it ain’t coming back. Very good block return and volley frame. I play a lot of Dubs too and I think this will play Dubs just as well as my previous 2 Wilson’s. But for Dubs only guys, I don’t think this is the ticket. And here’s something very specific: when facing a fast serve, sometimes I don’t have enough time on the FH to get to SW grip and hit the topspin drive. With the RF97A I was able to hit the Conti FH slice deeper and harder than my other Wilson’s for sure. A nice option to have against big servers.

Bottom Line – this is definitely an all-court attacker’s stick imo. I’m already quickly adjusting to the shots I couldn’t hit initially. My limited match results are better so far, although it is early. Exactly what I was looking for. Maybe 2-4 more points won in a close set against a strong opponent, which changes the match result, if that holds true over time. I had one match for example where 5 BH approaches off short balls didn’t come back. Opponent netted all 5 passing shots due to heaviness of my ball. Normally I’d have to make 1-2 volleys to finish that type of point on har-tru. Priceless, if that holds true over time. I have 2 tournaments coming up, results don’t lie. That will give me the answer. But I’m trying to get ahold of a 2nd frame asap for sure.

You can really hurt an opponent with this stick. You can win a point or gain a big advantage with 1 good ball. You can go from defense to offense quickly. I think the market for this frame is actually pretty limited. But for a 4.5 all-court player and above who is strong and already playing a heavy frame, say 12.2 or more, this might be your holy grail. Pure Drive and APD guys will not be switching to this one. But this is contra-Babolat that an all court player needs to beat the highly skilled players wielding a Babolat, who may not have as much variety in their game. That's a matchup I get a lot.

Another specific pattern I can attest to – you’re in a rally, you hit a deep, heavy forehand to the opponents BH. He floats the reply a little bit. You can decide to come in late with this stick with confidence and then crush that awkward first volley even from behind the service line, with total confidence. Point’s either over then or worst case, 1 more easy volley.

Rob,
Nice review. I think you are seeing what everyone else is seeing. One thing that may help that I noticed when hitting earlier today. The more aggressive you are with your shot, the better it plays. Don't hold back. Especially on the FH and 2nd serve. If you try just rolling in a serve you'll either net it or hit it long. Take a big cut at the forehand with as much top as you can put on it and you will be rewarded. I think it is because of what you mentioned with the SW. It does seem to take a longer time to get the racket head moving compared to the 90 even with it being more head light. My playing partner today was late on EVERYTHING whenever I didn't hold back. And when I was aggressive I had no problem keeping it in the court, whereas if I just tried to hit a rally ball on the forehand it would sail.
 
I thought I'd chime in too with my review now I've had few hours court time with the racket and had time to write it so here goes...

Background:

I’m a 29 year old male who predominately plays singles but also plays a fair bit of doubles. Aggressive baseliner who isn’t afraid to come to the net to mix things up. We don't use NTRP ratings in England but would estimate around 4.5.

My racquet of choice over the years has been the various iterations of the Six One 95 16x18 customised with nothing more than a leather grip and over grip. However I do have a tendency to flirt with the Pro Staff 90 from time to time (only for practice and drills as opposed to match play).

Specs of racket for the review:

Strung weight: 365grams

Balance point: 32.5cm

Strings: Lux Alu Power Rough @ 56lbs in the mains and Pacific Space Power TX @ 59lbs in the crosses

Design:

Firstly, I know there have been quite a few detractors of the new paintjob but I for one am not one of them. While I would have preferred the racquet to be predominately black, in I actually like the red and think it provides a nice contrast against the matte black of the frame. It is definitely a frame that looks 100 per cent better in person.

Weight and manoeuvrability:

Just as many reviewers have pointed out, the frame has a solid and weighty feel when you pick it up. This shouldn’t surprise anyone and anyone who has played with a 12+ ounces racquet won’t be put off by it. In my opinion, it’s nice to see Wilson have helped broaden the breadth of 12+ ounces racquets in the >95sq market.

As mentioned in my earlier post, with its 97sq inch head size, coupled with it being near on 13 ounces, it feels a tad slower coming through the air than a Pro Staff 90 but it certainly doesn’t feel any slower than the Six One 95. I personally found it as easy if not easier to swing than the Six One 95 so I would expect anyone who has played with any of the full fat iterations of the Six One 95 to have no problems swinging this stick for extended periods.

Groundstrokes:

The extra power provided by the frame was immediately noticeable upon my first few groundstrokes. In fact, when warming up on my first few hits, I found I was hitting the ball long. However it didn't take long to find my range and I was soon able to hit deep, heavy and penetrating balls. To really make the most of the racket on ground strokes and control the power I found that you had to really stay on the gas. It rewards aggression, a full fast swing and sound mechanics. If on the other hand you remain passive and just push the ball back or are late with your swing, this racquet won’t give you anything (other than unforced errors). However, keep the racket head speed up, commit to your shots and this thing will literally vaporize the ball. I can see why it’s being marketed for attackers.

Once dialled in, I found I was able to generate significant topspin on my forehand side (much more than I was expecting given it’s only 2 sq inches larger than the 95 I’m accustomed to). In fact, I was frequently seeing the ball jump up off the court catching my hitting partner off guard or see the ball diving in and catching the line when I was expecting it to go long. As for flat forehand drives this is where I felt the racquet excelled (so long as you leant in and hit through it). With its extra power and hefty swing weight, this racquet was made for putting away any short balls that sat up.

On the backhand side, I initially had a little trouble with my topspin backhand and had to work a little harder to find my range but after a while I was starting to find my rhythm. I had more success when flattening the ball out on the backhand side and the extra power was very welcome. My favourite shot on the backhand side though was the slice and I felt I was really able to knife through the ball to create some devilishly low shots that penetrated the court nicely.

When pressed into a defensive situation, the racquet unsurprisingly remained absolutely rock solid and it never really felt like it was getting pushed around. I can’t recall many racquets (if any) that have felt this robust when under pressure. The mass, extra square inches and the resulting extra power really helped in keeping me in the rally by enabling me to push the ball back deep, even when just blocking the ball back, helping turn defence into attack.

Volleys:

Just like the others I found that this stick to be absolutely rock solid at the net which shouldn’t be surprising given it’s mass. It was equally at home redirecting pace at the net or punching the ball away and just felt so plush each time contact was made. With its larger head size and sweet spot I thought control might be an issue but was pleasantly surprised that volleys had plenty of control and I had no trouble directing shots where I wanted them to go. The other bonus of the larger head size and sweet spot is that it’s also much more forgiving than either the 90 or 95 at the net meaning there’s less chance of a mishit. I really believe that this is one area that the racquet really excels at and would encourage many players (including myself) to come to the net more or play more doubles.

Serve:

This is one area I had a little difficulty with. Given that my stick of choice is the Six One 95 I naively thought that transitioning to the RF97 for serves was going to be straightforward. However it hasn’t gone quite as smoothly as I would have hoped.

I didn’t have any issue generating racket head speed or creating power, as my hitting partner remarked that he felt a perceptible increase in the speed and ‘heaviness’ of the ball when I was serving (flat). The problem I encountered was that while I was getting more ‘zip’, I didn’t feel I had as much control and found quite a few of my first serves going a little too wide or long. I therefore found myself talking a little off the serve to get my flat serve in. With a bit more time, I’m confident I could adjust to make it work.

On the other hand, I had more success with the slice and kick serve, getting some increased ‘action’ on these serves. I could really see the ball sliding away/jumping up on my hitting partner, making life difficult for him when returning serve.

Return of serve:

Given the racquet excels at blocking and slicing the ball back, it comes as little surprise that it’s a fine racquet to return serve with. I found it incredibly stable when blocking the ball back, finding good depth when doing so. I was also able to effectively chip the ball back when I wanted to add a bit of variety.

When I had time to line up a shot and really attack the serve, this is when things got really rewarding. Admittedly, I missed a few of these as they sailed long but when I got it right, the sheer mass and power of the racket not only enabled me to redirect and return the ball, but send it back with plenty of interest. Few shots were more gratifying that crushing a week serve with this racket.

Feel:

If you’re expecting the feel of the traditional box beam Pro Staffs, then you’re going to be disappointed. It’s a very different feel which is understandable given the frame shape. However it’s also very different to the Six One line. It’s hard to describe but in my opinion it retains some of that familiar buttery/silky feel of the pro staffs of old but is altogether more plush. It also doesn’t transmit or give quite as much feedback as it’s box beam predecessors. Part of this buttery/silky feel, I imagine, can be attributed to the expanded sweet spot, which feels huge in comparison to the 90 and even the 95 but also the braided graphite and Kevlar layup. In fact, the sweet spot feels so large it seems like nearly every shot is being struck cleanly.

The only downside with the expanded sweet spot and the slight lack of feedback is that, I did have some trouble executing touch shots. However with time I imagine I would get used to it.

In comparison to the Six One 95 16x18 I found the string bed to offer a slightly more predictable which was a real bonus.

As for stiffness, my opinion is that it plays stiffer than any of the Pro Staff 90s or Six One 95s I’ve hit with (which is every version since the Hyper Carbon for both). However with that said it doesn’t feel overly stiff, certainly not Babolat APD stiff, and part of this may have been due to having the tension of the strings 3lbs higher than I normally play with - and after 5 hours with it I haven't experienced any arm problems.

Summary:

I can’t really fault anything about this stick as it’s all there for you to take advantage with so long as you’ve good technique and are willing to put the work in. I know a few people have pointed out the weight and manoeuvrability of the racquet as being an issue but honestly, find one that is on spec or just below and it really isn’t that intimidating and no harder to swing than any Six One 95.

With its spec and what it offers, this stick is ideally suited to players who really like to attack the ball. I could also see it being well suited to counter punchers as it is very adept stick at not only defending with but turning the tide with as the racquet can easily transform defensive shots into offensive ones. In addition, it has the makings of a great doubles stick given it’s a joy volley with.

I wouldn’t recommend it for those who like to sit back and grind or play passively as this stick just won’t give you anything in return for that style of play - and there can be no doubt that this frame is better suited to the more advanced player rather than a beginner.

All in all, I think this is a great evolution of a player’s racquet and I would certainly recommend that anyone who has ever played with the Pro Staff or Six One lineage to have a go with it.
 
Last edited:
Thanks BP.

Just noticed a few typos :oops: which I've corrected - so hope that didn't spoil the read too much.

I wanted to write it sooner but thought I'd be able to provide a more accurate review after a few sessions with it. It also took a lot longer to write up than expected...
 
Well my fears came true last night as this happened to my arm while using 97A...next set switched back to six.one 95 18x20 and felt like magic spell was lifted off of my arm and we all know six.one 95 is not exactly soft...

Upxs9lY.gif
 
Well my fears came true last night as this happened to my arm while using 97A...next set switched back to six.one 95 18x20 and felt like magic spell was lifted off of my arm and we all know six.one 95 is not exactly soft...

Upxs9lY.gif

I can definitely state that you DO NOT want to play with this racket if you have any form of TE.
 
Confirms my suspicions that 67RA is 67RA. But I may still grab a PS97 to mess with. Why not?

But the way the PS95 has been treating me, it will be tough to switch.

I aso have a tfight 315 which is in many ways similar to the PS97. I think the main difference is the sweet spot is smaller on the Tfight, and the power level will be higher.
 
I can definitely state that you DO NOT want to play with this racket if you have any form of TE.

Here's the funny part I rarely if ever have a any kind of arm troubles I can only imagine what will this stick do to the likes of Mikeler and my friend elbovich (my nickname for him since he calls me Demovic lol)
 
Confirms my suspicions that 67RA is 67RA. But I may still grab a PS97 to mess with. Why not?

But the way the PS95 has been treating me, it will be tough to switch.

I aso have a tfight 315 which is in many ways similar to the PS97. I think the main difference is the sweet spot is smaller on the Tfight, and the power level will be higher.

Main difference I noticed with 315ltd is stability of one hander (most likely due to string spacing as rf97 seem to be made for one hander and even the sweet spot is higher in the string bed, could not be mass as my 315ltd has identical specs as my 97a) and not to mention comfort 64 unstrung RA vs 70.5RA ...I think for two handed player there will be no benefits...
 
Last edited:
Here's the funny part I rarely if ever have a any kind of arm troubles I can only imagine what will this stick do to the likes of Mikeler and my friend elbovich (my nickname for him since he calls me Demovic lol)

won't be a "home run" for the marshmallow elbow types...lol
 
Update.....

I played my first 4.5 league match with the RF97 today. I basically blew the guy off the court 0 and 4. Had a little sun in the eyes issue in the 2nd set, but came back from 0-3 to win 6 of the last 7 games.

Serves... When I hit the flat bomb, even if he got a racket on it the return was either long or wide. Kicker jumped up head high. Still having a lot of problems controlling the wide slice. The extra topspin you get from the wider string pattern compared to the 90 definitely makes the ball dive a little quicker. I'm getting at least 10 mph more with this racket compared to the 90 with the same string, probably closer to 15.

Forehand... Devastating. He tried to push me after the first 4 games, and anything he hit without pace I blasted into a corner for a winner. At the end of the match I finally got the feel for the heavy ball that I used to have with the 90, and he was late on everything.

Backhand... Steady, but when he hit with no pace I had a little more problem with timing. Eventually I'd hit a heavy slice which I've never been able to it so well before. Still trying to get the feel for a heavy topspin backhand, but I can tell I'm getting close. Biggest problem is that I get occasionally late and with the heft of this racket it's pretty hard to catch up.

Volleys... It can be very easy to overhit the volleys. Better just to direct the ball where you want to go instead of hitting the volley with a little more pace. The racket does all the work for you if you let it.

Return of serve... Hit at least 10 winners off of return of serve. You have to stay aggressive on returns with this racket or they start to float.

Later today I hit with my normal hitting partner and I let him hit with one of my RF's. He instantly fell in love with it. His strokes were instantly grooved to this racket and were coming very heavy to me. I finally got my forehand grooved and we were just bashing the ball with heavy topspin and pace and the ball was staying in the court almost no matter hard you hit it. I'd say my pace is a good 20% faster with this racket compared to the 90. But you don't dare get late or you will plant the ball in the fence.

Final thoughts... I think this racket is going to be a lot more popular than I originally thought. As heavy as it is there is no one that is going to be able to hit through you with this racket. It's a little tougher to pick up the low skidder with this racket compared to the 90, but if you perfect your block you can basically direct it anywhere you want to go on a defensive shot. The guys that would probably love this racket more than anyone would be DelPotro, Berdych, Dimitrov, or Cilic. You can hit bombs off of any wing with this racket, but still have plenty of control if you hit a heavy topspin ball.
 
Totally agree with you on this point. This was one of the shots I had a bit of trouble with, especially when on the run.
I wonder why? Because isn't the sweetspot on the RF97A huge, as many people who have hit with it have noted? So I assume that means the sweetspot extends further up towards the upper hoop? Because, as everyone knows, the upper part of the hoop on the Tour 90s is pretty dead.
 
I wonder why? Because isn't the sweetspot on the RF97A huge, as many people who have hit with it have noted? So I assume that means the sweetspot extends further up towards the upper hoop? Because, as everyone knows, the upper part of the hoop on the Tour 90s is pretty dead.

Hard to pinpoint exactly why due to the limited time I’ve had with it. However based on my limited experience, I think this might be the one area where the manoeuvrability (and the power to an extent) might be an issue as I had to really whip up on the ball (on the forehand wing), often with a reverse finish, to not only get the ball over the net but bring it down again when faced with a low skidding ball. I found this to be a harder shot to execute consistently with the RF97 than either the PS90 or 6.1 95.

Wasn’t so much of an issue on the backhand side as I could employ the slice.
 
Hard to pinpoint exactly why due to the limited time I’ve had with it. However based on my limited experience, I think this might be the one area where the manoeuvrability (and the power to an extent) might be an issue as I had to really whip up on the ball (on the forehand wing), often with a reverse finish, to not only get the ball over the net but bring it down again when faced with a low skidding ball. I found this to be a harder shot to execute consistently with the RF97 than either the PS90 or 6.1 95.

Wasn’t so much of an issue on the backhand side as I could employ the slice.

It may be as simple as the sweetspot is a little higher off the court due to the wider racket, even if it is only a few millimeters, and you can't get the racket low enough to hit the sweetspot. Plus, the racket is a lot more powerful. I'm still having troubles hitting touch shots, but I think that will come as I play with the racket more.
 
It may be as simple as the sweetspot is a little higher off the court due to the wider racket, even if it is only a few millimeters, and you can't get the racket low enough to hit the sweetspot. Plus, the racket is a lot more powerful. I'm still having troubles hitting touch shots, but I think that will come as I play with the racket more.

That was the problem I had when I playtested the 2014 Six.One 95 16x18. That racquet was so powerful and it lacked feel for my taste. I couldn't tell what the ball was doing when it made contact with the stringbed. I hated it.

Please tell me these PS RF97A isn't anything like those Six.One's. I'm frightened because their specs and construction are so similar.
 
Well, I for one hope it is similar to the 6.1 16x18. I played with one for the first time last night (don't really know why I never tried it before) and I thought it was pretty amazing. The power was amazing for a player's frame. Anything short was just completely annihilated. Woo hoo!
 
Back
Top