It almost requires the same technique as the pure aero to keep the ball in..
Have you thought about the Prestige MP? I actually liked the orig PS 16x19 better than the 18x20. Everyone has their preferences thoughInteresting how we all perceive things differently for me tour is better racquet softer more plow less effort to play with less vibration. Monster on spin but can crush flat like nobody’s business.
Only if one must go with lighter version (shoulder injury, fitness etc) I would say ok if you must...
There's some distance inconsistency due to the higher launch angle but the ball comes off the strings mostly with the speed that is expected and in the direction I am aiming, with directional control being better than length control. There was no "hot spot" where the ball would unexpectedly fly long.
It is interesting you both have similar comments about the 16M. I am not experiencing inconsistencies in shot depth or direction with the Tour, I am now curious as to how the 16M differs from the Tour to induce inconsistencies, reduced weight/mass is enough to account for this?I had mixed feelings for this Racket. Ground strokes weren’t as consistent compared to my normal play. It has plenty of power but lacks in the consistency department on length of shot at times.
I also noticed that @Blade0324 also reported the same kind of launch angle issues - that review was after your post. In my case, I noticed this launch angle inconsistency most when I was in an offensive position and tried to press my advantage with a high racquet head speed shot. I think that as I get near the point where the racquet feels insufficiently massive for the speed of the swing, the response gets inconsistent, both by being non-linear in that you don't get additional ball speed that corresponds with the additional racquet head speed, but also that the launch angle gets inconsistent. That might happen because the hoop is bending in funny ways and/or is partly recoiling away from the contact point and providing inconsistent string/ball pressure that causes the launch angle to change.It is interesting you both have similar comments about the 16M. I am not experiencing inconsistencies in shot depth or direction with the Tour, I am now curious as to how the 16M differs from the Tour to induce inconsistencies, reduced weight/mass is enough to account for this?
Glad to hear you also feel that - I was starting to wonder if I just imagined it, especially since the racquet is pretty stable and consistent otherwise. I am pretty sure it is not a result of the string as I've used Tourna S7T in many other racquets and the response is linear and consistent up to my maximum swing speed.Very interesting comments Injured Again. I can say that I noticed the same thing. Seemed as if the faster I was swinging the more inconsistent the ball trajectory off the strings became. I almost had the feeling that the top of the hoop would lag behind the rest of the racquet making it difficult to predict the results of the ball off the strings. I noticed this a lot on serves as well.
Interesting. That would imply that the internal structure of the hoop is relatively the same or identical. Where is the extra weight in the Tour, and how does adding two extra mains create more launch angle consistency? I've been doing an extended test of the 16X19 and 18X20 v7 Blades and there is no hint of this launch angle inconsistency despite me using the exact same string as in the Pure Strike and at basically the same tension. When I overlay the Pure Strike 16X19 over the Blade 16X19, the outer mains are about 2 mm narrower on each side on the Pure Strike, though the top cross is probably 4 mm higher and the bottom cross 6-7 mm lower than on the Blade. It's a pretty small difference when spread over so many strings and seems to indicate that the issue is caused by the frame and not the string.Edit Correction: RDC numbers are practically the same and twist-weights are the same.
I am sure there are manufacturing variances but tour and standard model i tried are different with tour playing way more comfortable even when std was string with multi and tour with alu power tour was still way more plusher and flexible but i noticed that (unfortunately) I am very sensitive to flex so I can detect flex differences easier than others again unfortunately lolEdit Correction: RDC numbers are practically the same and twist-weights are the same.
I think they have different layups. The vibration frequency measured by TWU is very different. Some might say the weight difference explains the difference in Hz though.Are the Tour and regular models listed with the same RA or is the Tour stiffer?
I was on this playtest (still working on my write up) and I can confirm the regular 16x19 is stiff as indicated by the RA and vibration frequency. Basically stiff and polarized like most of Babolat’s current offerings. The tour most likely has more weight in the throat and a little more weight in the handle.I am sure there are manufacturing variances but tour and standard model i tried are different with tour playing way more comfortable even when std was string with multi and tour with alu power tour was still way more plusher and flexible but i noticed that (unfortunately) I am very sensitive to flex so I can detect flex differences easier than others again unfortunately lol
|Racquet:||Babolat Pure Strike Tour 3rd Gen (16 x 19)|
|String||Tourna Black Zone||Babolat RPM Blast Rough||Babolat Xcel|
|How many hours did you play with the racquet?||10||10||7.5|
|Tension notes:||I am reluctant to lower the tension because the string bed actually felt a bit softer than I like with the Tourna BZ 17 and the RPM Blast Rough 17 at 50/52. In fact, on the next go around I will marginally increase tension on the polys - the arm will be able to tell if that is better or worse. In contrast, the full bed of Xcel at 61 felt very good until it broke.|
|Tennis experience/background:||Play 4 to 5 times weekly about 10 to 15 hours on hard courts mostly.|
Played from age 10 to 25 y.o. on red clay (75%), two decade break and have been playing weekly after that. Played for the high school team, then in universty intra-mural tournaments, and now play competitively as well as in social groups.
Mix of singles 15% and doubles 85%, but mostly doubles in competitive leagues.
|Describe your playing style (i.e. serve & volley):||All court player focused on point construction using variety in ball placement, and speed around the court. In doubles, I am good at the net and finding angles with drop shots and top spin dippers.|
|Current racquet/string setups:||Quarterly rotation through a group of Prince EXO3 Graphite 93 <-> Dunlop Aerogel 4D 200 Tour 16x18 <-> Dunlop Aerogel 4D 200 18x20 <-> Volkl Organix 10 (325).|
All of these racquets are in the 360-370 gram range and balance of 30.5cm (12 points head light) and have beams of 19mm, 20mm and 20mm, respectively.
The Organix 10 are the stiffest racuets in the collection and my least favorite in the cycle - I bought them to appreciate a stiffer racquet and still working on it.
All 1.25mm in the 22kg +/-1 (48lb) range with Kirschbaum Pro Line Evolution, Tourna Black Zone.
I am not a string breaker in any of my regular racquets, but do restring after 15-20 hours of play depending on the type of players on the opposing side.
|Comments on racquet performance:|
|-Groundstrokes:||8.5 Solid generally and it felt good on most strokes (forehand drives, one handed backhand, heavily sliced approaches), but a bit jarring at times on some off-center shot.|
On the other hand, this was mitigated because I could really appreciate the generous "sweet spot" in comparison to the Organix 10 325g. And, even though they have very similar specs in other respects I could feel the stiffness of the PST3G in my forearm after playing with it exclusively. I still prefer the Aerogel 4D 200 Tour over the Pure Strke Tour and this may be the difference in their flex/stiffness.
|-Serves:||9.0 Excellent power and control vis a vis placement. Starting off points with a deep, well-placed served helped bootstrap confidence in what is a relatively stiff racquet for me in the context of serves and groundstrokes.|
|-Volleys:||8.0 Felt a bit sluggish occasionally on backhand reaction volleys at the net and framed some bang bang doubles volleys. May be the slightly wider beam than I use typically (19-20mm) with the racquets in my cycle see list above? Don't know.|
|-Serve returns:||9.0 Excellent experience returning power serves given the mass of this racquet. It was a confidence enabled on blocks, chips, sliced backhand, and forehand drives. On one-handed top spin backhand return of a softer second serve, i felt it was sluggish and I had a little less control, but it was most likely operator preparation error.|
|General reaction/comments on overall performance:||For each string I played one session with the racquet in near stock form with a thin overgrip for an hour before adding a second overgrip and increasing the weight to 365 grams and adjusting the balance to 12 points HL for subsequent sessions with the same string.|
Overall - I liked this racquest relative to the Babolat APD and Pure Drive I tested locally years ago. However, it is not the Pure Storm LTD GT, which was a great racquet.
I intend to keep this racquet in the rotation and experiment with different string to convince myself I need to upgrade to a new set.