Pro Stocks

Alexrb

Professional
Anyone else disappointed and less inclined to buy a major brand racquet when you read all these threads about pro stocks and paint jobs?

Before you say we shouldn't be using the same racquets anyways, hear me out. Which is a more valuable review, a TW play tester who's spent an hour with a piece of equipment. Or one of the top 100 players in the world, who look to gain any competitive edge they possibly can and play 6+ hours a day.

I used to enjoy the process of trying racquets I then thought the pros were using. Now I have no idea. They all could be totally custom racquets (or shoes etc) made to look like retail sticks so that we will buy them. And I mean why would someone making millions a year play with a $200 stick anyways?

/end rant
 

drakulie

Talk Tennis Guru
Most frames pros use (that are not sold to public), were at one time or another regular stock frames. The companies simply don't provide them to the public anymore because they want to sell their newest product.
 

Alexrb

Professional
Most frames pros use (that are not sold to public), were at one time or another regular stock frames. The companies simply don't provide them to the public anymore because they want to sell their newest product.

Isn't that a major indication that their newest product pales in comparison? I know tennis is a game of feel and players get attached to their equipment, but surely they would switch if the new technology was that much better.
 

Fuji

Legend
It's about results not feel for a lot of guys. 99% of players I know that have national level tennis experience, and have played futures use regular rackets off the shelf. Only 1 player I know that was sponsored through Head in his playing days had prostocks that weren't based off a current retail mold. (He used the Prestige classic, so he used PT10's during his training days.) Other than that all these guys are using stock pure drives, areo pros, blades, 6.1s, pure storms, etc.

-Fuji
 

floydcouncil

Professional
Isn't that a major indication that their newest product pales in comparison? I know tennis is a game of feel and players get attached to their equipment, but surely they would switch if the new technology was that much better.

It's not a major indication of how good or bad the current offering is.

For the pros, it's all about confidence they have about their equipment and the consistency. Imagine if a pro is forced to change every time a manufacturer updates a certain model.
Therefore, he/she uses what they have been using in the past under a new paintjob. That's got nothing to do with how "good" or "bad" a current model (if it exists any more) is.

Make sense?

If you polled top 100 from ATP and WTA, you'd be surprised how many of them use non-pro stock racquets modified to each players' taste.
 
Last edited:

THESEXPISTOL

Hall of Fame
There are still few brands that offer decent racquets instead of hollow crap...
The last to one to leave the ship was Dunlop that ceased the production of decent retail racquets after Biomimetic.
Man those aerogel 200/300 were sweet!

HEAD ditched the best-seller radical mold, tinkered with the Prestige MP and the ruined the Prestige mid and the pro too...
 

WhereIsMacMac

Professional
There are still few brands that offer decent racquets instead of hollow crap...
The last to one to leave the ship was Dunlop that ceased the production of decent retail racquets after Biomimetic.
Man those aerogel 200/300 were sweet!

HEAD ditched the best-seller radical mold, tinkered with the Prestige MP and the ruined the Prestige mid and the pro too...


Gotta agree with you on the Dunlops and the Heads. Dunlop's good until they added the shark skin technology on their frames, etc. And the newer Radicals doesn't feel like the old ones too.
 

Alexrb

Professional
It's not a major indication of how good or bad the current offering is.

For the pros, it's all about confidence they have about their equipment and the consistency. Imagine if a pro is forced to change every time a manufacturer updates a certain model.
Therefore, he/she uses what they have been using in the past under a new paintjob. That's got nothing to do with how "good" or "bad" a current model (if it exists any more) is.

Make sense?

If you polled top 100 from ATP and WTA, you'd be surprised how many of them use non-pro stock racquets modified to each players' taste.

Not sure I agree, even the two posts below yours mention poor quality in todays racquets.

With the ability to match racquet specs fairly easily, wouldn't it be a simple process for a pro to receive a new model with the same modded specs and see if he likes it for one of his hitting sessions?
 

Doubles

Legend
Not sure I agree, even the two posts below yours mention poor quality in todays racquets.

With the ability to match racquet specs fairly easily, wouldn't it be a simple process for a pro to receive a new model with the same modded specs and see if he likes it for one of his hitting sessions?

Here's the thing. Why would you want to switch if it's something you're comfortable with? Do you get a new car every 2 years? No. You stick with what you have until it's broken down (assuming you're like a majority of people, at least). It's the same with pros and their racquets. It's not to say that the new one's are crap, as it is: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
 

drakulie

Talk Tennis Guru
Not sure I agree, even the two posts below yours mention poor quality in todays racquets.

Even if todays racquets are "poor quality", its what juniors are playing with. Mind you, juniors of today are the pros we will all watch on TV tomorrow. So, they will most likely, when becoming pro, keep what they are use to and got them to the pro level.

This is true for most of the pros we are watching on tv right now,,,,,,,, they continue playing with the same frames they played with as juniors.

Lasltly, if "we" (the consumer) stop buying the "latest and greatest" from the manufacturers, they will go out of business.
 
Here's the thing. Why would you want to switch if it's something you're comfortable with? Do you get a new car every 2 years? No. You stick with what you have until it's broken down (assuming you're like a majority of people, at least). It's the same with pros and their racquets. It's not to say that the new one's are crap, as it is: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

Just to counter argue, I loved playing with a few Fischer frames that were 98. However I feel my best hitting has come from weighted DNX10 mids... I like them very very much, but not as much as the Fischers. I would love to be able to get the feeling I had on impact from the Fischer racquets in the the Volkl's. This would be a reason IMO to tweak the layup a player is using on tour.
 

Alexrb

Professional
Here's the thing. Why would you want to switch if it's something you're comfortable with? Do you get a new car every 2 years? No. You stick with what you have until it's broken down (assuming you're like a majority of people, at least). It's the same with pros and their racquets. It's not to say that the new one's are crap, as it is: if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

To go along with your analogy, because it is an excellent one... If I was racing cars for a living, I would most definitely switch cars every chance I could.
 

Alexrb

Professional
Even if todays racquets are "poor quality", its what juniors are playing with. Mind you, juniors of today are the pros we will all watch on TV tomorrow. So, they will most likely, when becoming pro, keep what they are use to and got them to the pro level.

This is true for most of the pros we are watching on tv right now,,,,,,,, they continue playing with the same frames they played with as juniors.

Lasltly, if "we" (the consumer) stop buying the "latest and greatest" from the manufacturers, they will go out of business.

Dolgopolov custom drilled his racquet into a different drilling pattern. He obviously tried the new spin racquets and felt his racquet drilled was still better.

Dimitrov same thing.

Federer has a custom prototype, so he obviously didn't like the current offerings.

I read a little bit about option A/B/C pro stocks for a company (pacific?) which is totally different than their retails.

Those are just the ones I know about...
 

Doubles

Legend
To go along with your analogy, because it is an excellent one... If I was racing cars for a living, I would most definitely switch cars every chance I could.

Why? What benefit would you get from changing every chance you could? Having to refamiliarize yourself with something different? How does that benefit you?
 

Alexrb

Professional
Why? What benefit would you get from changing every chance you could? Having to refamiliarize yourself with something different? How does that benefit you?

To answer your question, I would have very little benefit from changing every chance I could. Because lets face it, I suck. I'm more interested in why pros aren't switching.

The fact that the pros use the same stick for 5+ years has to say something about the newer racquets. To continue along your amazing car analogy, what if the equivalent of the hybrid car was invented for racquets. Wouldn't someone who spends an exorbitant amount of time commuting benefit from switching to the new technology?
 

drakulie

Talk Tennis Guru
Dolgopolov custom drilled his racquet into a different drilling pattern. He obviously tried the new spin racquets and felt his racquet drilled was still better.

Dimitrov same thing.

Federer has a custom prototype, so he obviously didn't like the current offerings.

I read a little bit about option A/B/C pro stocks for a company (pacific?) which is totally different than their retails.

Those are just the ones I know about...

Those are 3 players out of 1000's.......

For example, Nadal continues to use the very first APD ever produced. It was a stock frame, that could be purchsed in any tennis store. Same for Haas (Head Pro Tour 280), Jack Sock continues using the Aero Storm, Joker Radical Mid Plus, etc, etc, etc
 
Last edited:

dr325i

G.O.A.T.
Most frames pros use (that are not sold to public), were at one time or another regular stock frames. The companies simply don't provide them to the public anymore because they want to sell their newest product.

I understand what your point is, however, I do not recall the PT630 ever being released to the public at 325g strung, or PC600 at 330g strung.
There is a difference between the Pro stock and "regular old stock"...
 
Dolgopolov custom drilled his racquet into a different drilling pattern. He obviously tried the new spin racquets and felt his racquet drilled was still better.

Dimitrov same thing.

Federer has a custom prototype, so he obviously didn't like the current offerings.

I read a little bit about option A/B/C pro stocks for a company (pacific?) which is totally different than their retails.

Those are just the ones I know about...

Yes but they only changed the drill pattern not the whole frame. They tried the spin effect rackets and liked the "effect" and now they are using it. I don;t think they changed rackets.
 
Isn't that a major indication that their newest product pales in comparison? I know tennis is a game of feel and players get attached to their equipment, but surely they would switch if the new technology was that much better.

Umm... No? It's an indication that tennis players would rather stick with what they grew up and familiar with, than to venture into something new and take a chance.
 
I understand what your point is, however, I do not recall the PT630 ever being released to the public at 325g strung, or PC600 at 330g strung.
There is a difference between the Pro stock and "regular old stock"...

Different flex, sure. Different headsize, sure.

But if it's weight and to some degree, balance, that's nothing you can't do yourself.
 
I understand what your point is, however, I do not recall the PT630 ever being released to the public at 325g strung, or PC600 at 330g strung.
There is a difference between the Pro stock and "regular old stock"...

Exactly.. PT57a is to Pro tour 630, what TGT293.2 is to retail IG Prestige mp for example.. Just a lighter hairpin that you can customize to your own liking.
 

Doubles

Legend
To answer your question, I would have very little benefit from changing every chance I could. Because lets face it, I suck. I'm more interested in why pros aren't switching.

The fact that the pros use the same stick for 5+ years has to say something about the newer racquets. To continue along your amazing car analogy, what if the equivalent of the hybrid car was invented for racquets. Wouldn't someone who spends an exorbitant amount of time commuting benefit from switching to the new technology?

You analogy is flawed as there is no correlation between a hybrid and a tennis racquet. A normal car that runs on gasoline, however, does. Now, if I'm perfectly happy with my 98 why would I get e new car? Are there cars that out preform my own? Sure. But that's not what matters to me. I'm comfortable with what I have. The same way pros are. It's not that new sticks are bad, its that plenty of pros just don't want to mess with a good thing. They're comfortable with their racquets and changing could mess that up.
 

lgbalfa

Professional
what is the definition of a pro stock racquet? i can't really find any real definition on it.

i though all racquets for the pro's were retails versions that start out that way and then they become customized.
 

drakulie

Talk Tennis Guru
I understand what your point is, however, I do not recall the PT630 ever being released to the public at 325g strung, or PC600 at 330g strung.
There is a difference between the Pro stock and "regular old stock"...

The PT280 and/or 630 were 330?? strung I believe or maybe 340.

However, if you are referring to the "PT" equivalents, then Yes, they are much lighter than retail, and in that case, then the OP would have a point. That said, most juniors, as I stated earlier, would not have been playing with these (for the most part). They would have been mostly playing with retail sticks.

Exactly.. PT57a is to Pro tour 630, what TGT293.2 is to retail IG Prestige mp for example.. Just a lighter hairpin that you can customize to your own liking.

PT57A is a 16x19, whereas the Pro Tour is a 18x20.
 

drakulie

Talk Tennis Guru
what is the definition of a pro stock racquet? i can't really find any real definition on it.

i though all racquets for the pro's were retails versions that start out that way and then they become customized.

Pro Stock racquets are frames that for the most part were never, and/or are no longer available to the public.

For example, the Wilson H22, which is typically painted to look like the Wilson Blades. Or the Pro Staff 93, which is now painted to look like the Pro Staff 95. etc, etc, etc

There are also many frames which are the same mold as the current frame available to the public, yet manufactured to the players liking with a specific weight, balance, swing-weight, flex, and even string pattern, etc.
 

drakulie

Talk Tennis Guru
Drak, the PT57A has two variants, 18x20 and 16x19.. ive had a number of them in 18x20 pattern with the PT57A code in the throat.

oh wow. My apologies to president.s sorry!!! :) Thanks for the correction.

wouldn't the PT57A (18x20) then just be a PT57?? Please shed some light on this for me. Thanks!!

The two I own have the PT57A code under the pallet. Both 16x19.
 

aimr75

Hall of Fame
oh wow. My apologies to president.s sorry!!! :) Thanks for the correction.

wouldn't the PT57A (18x20) then just be a PT57?? Please shed some light on this for me. Thanks!!

The two I own have the PT57A code under the pallet. Both 16x19.

They are actually both PT57A's, the 18x20 and the 16x19 are essentially just the pt630/280 in a lighter hairpin, just different drill pattern

Youve got the more difficult to obtain version! Lots of 18x20 versions come up for sale, but not many 16x19. Gilles Simon, Soderling, Haas use the 18x20 pt57a and Murray uses the 16x19
 

dr325i

G.O.A.T.
oh wow. My apologies to president.s sorry!!! :) Thanks for the correction.

wouldn't the PT57A (18x20) then just be a PT57?? Please shed some light on this for me. Thanks!!

The two I own have the PT57A code under the pallet. Both 16x19.

There is no "plain" PT57.

The 57A is the PT630 mold and comes in both 18x20 (examples: Sodeing, Simon...) and 16x19 (Murray).
57E is the I prestige MP mold.
There are a few other variants like 57F, 57B...
 

aimr75

Hall of Fame
Some 18x20 versions i had:

cimg3668a.jpg

cimg3660l.jpg



One of Murrays 16x19 with code in throat:

Head_PT57A_Murray_06.JPG

Head_PT57A_Murray_03.JPG
 

vsbabolat

G.O.A.T.
There is no "plain" PT57.

The 57A is the PT630 mold and comes in both 18x20 (examples: Sodeing, Simon...) and 16x19 (Murray).
57E is the I prestige MP mold.
There are a few other variants like 57F, 57B...

57B is the Radical Tour TwinTube 630
 

Seth

Legend
vsbabolat,

Is an off-the-shelf Liquidmetal Instinct Tour XL a PT161? Or is a PT161 the same mold as the Tour XL, but lighter?
 

Alexrb

Professional
You analogy is flawed as there is no correlation between a hybrid and a tennis racquet. A normal car that runs on gasoline, however, does. Now, if I'm perfectly happy with my 98 why would I get e new car? Are there cars that out preform my own? Sure. But that's not what matters to me. I'm comfortable with what I have. The same way pros are. It's not that new sticks are bad, its that plenty of pros just don't want to mess with a good thing. They're comfortable with their racquets and changing could mess that up.

A hybrid is a technology advancement to a car that runs on gasoline as a 2014 spin effect is a technological advancement to a racquet made without it.

You should really brush up on your use of analogies.

Are there cars that out preform my own? Sure.

This is exactly why pros "should" be switching. I guarantee you pros want the best equipment possible when playing for titles. Why would you lose out on advantages just because of comfort? Making equipment changes with technology is no different than making style changes as the game evolves. Pros do everything they can to get the competitive edge.
 

movdqa

Talk Tennis Guru
Frames do get better though better can be in the eyes of the beholder. I think that most will agree that the IG Prestiges are a lot better than the YT Prestiges and you can see this somewhat from the huge number of Pro Stock tgk238.4s that were available for sale compared to the far lower number of tgt293.2s that have come on the market. From what I've read, the Graphene generation appears to be a step back - haven't tried them myself and no plans to based on the reviews and specs that I've read. The vast majority of players do fine without Pro Stocks. They're more for gearheads (like me).
 

Doubles

Legend
A hybrid is a technology advancement to a car that runs on gasoline as a 2014 spin effect is a technological advancement to a racquet made without it.

You should really brush up on your use of analogies.

Are there cars that out preform my own? Sure.

This is exactly why pros "should" be switching. I guarantee you pros want the best equipment possible when playing for titles. Why would you lose out on advantages just because of comfort? Making equipment changes with technology is no different than making style changes as the game evolves. Pros do everything they can to get the competitive edge.

But why mess with a thing that you know works? New racquets aren't worse than old ones, but if I were to be good enough to be a pro, I wouldn't switch. Why? Because I would want to stick with the racquet that was good enough to get me to that point.
 

Matt H.

Professional
I have a pair of pt57a's that I play.

It's a problem because the feel is unparalleled to any retail stick (a hard backhand slice or volley, you fellow pt users know what I'm talking about), but it does not generate the pace or angle production like newer racquets.

My match play has suffered, but I can't stop playing the racquets. lol
 

Crisp

Professional
I myself have a bit of a problem with the pt57a and would appreciate a little assistance if anyone can help. I have two that are Ti rad paint job and also say s.e3 in the throat. I love them they are great and I would be happy to use them forever. I also have two in youtek radical paint...all are customised exactly the same but I don't like the youteks as much, they feel different. Can anyone shed some light on what the s.e3 edition has different to the regular 57a. Any help would be much appreciated.
 

DNShade

Hall of Fame
Are there cars that out preform my own? Sure.

This is exactly why pros "should" be switching. I guarantee you pros want the best equipment possible when playing for titles. Why would you lose out on advantages just because of comfort? Making equipment changes with technology is no different than making style changes as the game evolves. Pros do everything they can to get the competitive edge.


Your thinking is all off here. There really haven't been any major developments in racquet technology in decades to be honest (strings - yes -- sticks no). New racquets aren't any better than their predecessors. In fact it seems the reverse in most cases. More mass production - consolidation of factories to a few production facilities in China etc. So many older sticks actually feel a bit different and "better" to a lot of players: ergo, why a lot of players use "pro stock" - older models -- or "pro stock" which are made to a higher standard at a more controlled facility -- Kennelbach Austria I'm looking at you.

Not to mention -- a tennis player isn't going to be "out performed" by a racquet. Doesn't work that way. It's the player not the stick. Now maybe little things like changing to a bit bigger head size (Fed) or dialing in the right specs can help a bit -- but most of the time it's about maintaining the stick so it feels and plays the same every time -- so it's one less thing to have to think or worry about.

Tennis isn't like auto racing where you are looking for any mechanical or technological advances to get you over the finish line first.
 
Last edited:

WhereIsMacMac

Professional
This just popped out of my head. Now what if new racquets are made with the same standard like the older ones. With all of technology and stuff. Technology that actually works, that is.

I'm thinking maybe that's why pro stocks have that "higher standard" over retail ones.
 

Lefty78

Professional
I have two that are Ti rad paint job and also say s.e3 in the throat. Can anyone shed some light on what the s.e3 edition has different to the regular 57a.

Rare birds, those.

Different layup from regular pt57a.

Good luck finding more.
 

Crisp

Professional
Rare birds, those.

Different layup from regular pt57a.

Good luck finding more.

Do you happen to know what th difference is? I assumed all 57a were the same but havesincefound that not to be true and my preference is the se.3 version
 

Lefty78

Professional
^^^ Afraid I don't recall exactly. Back when the Pro Tour 630 was a current offering, Head produced several alternate layups for touring pros which were unavailable to the public. S.E.3 was one of them. I personally had a S.E.1, and the strung RA was like 64 if I remember correctly. I may be able to find out this week if it's important to you though.
 

Crisp

Professional
I'd really appreciate it lefty but don't go to to much trouble. Love to find a few if I can to stock up, but it sounds as if it will be difficult. Thinking ill sell my youtek 57a's as I don't like them anywhere near as much.
 
Last edited:

Alexrb

Professional
Your thinking is all off here. There really haven't been any major developments in racquet technology in decades to be honest (strings - yes -- sticks no). New racquets aren't any better than their predecessors. In fact it seems the reverse in most cases. More mass production - consolidation of factories to a few production facilities in China etc. So many older sticks actually feel a bit different and "better" to a lot of players: ergo, why a lot of players use "pro stock" - older models -- or "pro stock" which are made to a higher standard at a more controlled facility -- Kennelbach Austria I'm looking at you.

Not to mention -- a tennis player isn't going to be "out performed" by a racquet. Doesn't work that way. It's the player not the stick. Now maybe little things like changing to a bit bigger head size (Fed) or dialing in the right specs can help a bit -- but most of the time it's about maintaining the stick so it feels and plays the same every time -- so it's one less thing to have to think or worry about.

Tennis isn't like auto racing where you are looking for any mechanical or technological advances to get you over the finish line first.

Please see the third post in this thread...

Isn't that a major indication that their newest product pales in comparison? I know tennis is a game of feel and players get attached to their equipment, but surely they would switch if the new technology was that much better.
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
hey, I'm new to such topics so please go easy on me guys. What are some pro stock examples of thin beamed racquets with low flex and an open string pattern? I'm starting to turn into a racquethead thanks to all these discussions (though I'm not sure whether that is good or bad) and these are the specs I really gravitate towards. I'm thankful for any feedback and appreciate your know-how :)
 
Top