Bender
G.O.A.T.
Really regret not picking up a KPS 88 back when they were being sold brand new for pennies
THE MIGHTY PRO STAFF 90 THREAD
- Thread starter Bender
- Start date
slipgrip93
Professional
I got a pair of the kps88's in 2020 from the bay, unstrung preserved and still in the original packaging from some vendor in russia.
Nowadays a lightly used one is often being offer priced at over $600 to $800.
I'd strung them both but did not use one, and kept it in the closet. Now I can't really use it as it's too rare at that almost never swung condition (one time for a few swings hitting the ball for testing), and kept with the original packaging in the closet.
The other one I've been using as my main for the last five years. I had put protective tape on the edges of the head to protect from chipping at the small word details ("nanotechnology") etc., but other parts not covered by the protective tape got paint detail damaged or chipped over time, and the throat and details on it are smoothed and wearing out from use for five years.
My secondary racquet in the bag is a different racquet (an ntour95 from the bay) and only used if a string breaks. But yes, I wish I'd bought another one or pair back then too, as there were a few more offers then still, unstrung for each less than $230.
Last edited:
Alright, racquet tuners. I need some help on lead placement. I finally have time to customize and string my N90s today and hit with them tomorrow. I want strung specs to target around 8HL and 335 SW after an overgrip and gut/poly. I want to keep all of the lead under the grommets which means I can use the 10:30-1:30 region for lead placement. I need help on how much lead to use, how long to cut the strips, how many layers to use, and where in the 10:30-1:30 area they should be placed. Here are my unstrung specs with the plastic still on the handles:
R1
SW 289.1
WGT 11.93 oz / 338.1g
13HL
R2
SW 293.3
WGT 11.94 oz / 338.9g
12HL
R1
SW 289.1
WGT 11.93 oz / 338.1g
13HL
R2
SW 293.3
WGT 11.94 oz / 338.9g
12HL
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
Hopefully I can give you some insights with mine being an example. I don't think it'll take much for you to achieve what you want of 8HL (can't speak on SW, don't have a machine and I frankly don't care much for SW).
I prefer a super whippy racquet, and so I accentuated the factory balance such that, my strung balance is at minimum 10HL. So I did it by using lead at 3 and 9 o'clock, with an additional Tournagrip underneath. (kind of works out, I'm slightly larger than a 3/8, but not quite a 1/2).
Lead placement = 1 layer. Starting at 4H Cross, ending at 4T Cross
1 additional Tournagrip underneath to "offset" the lead.
Unstrung weight = ~354-356g
Unstrung balance = ~29.5cm
Strung weight = ~368-370g
Strung balance = ~30.7cm (I know it's hard to see, but I'm closer to 30.7cm.
So I think with your goal of 8HL, and you want to place them at 10:30/1:30 o'clock (much higher than mine). My ballpark guess is, a layer of lead from the 5H main to 8H main
You can do a mock by just resting the cut lead on top of the box beam at your preferred location so you don't have to take on/off the grommet just for the sake of experimentation too.
Last edited:
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
One last thing, in case you want to get super nerdy about it. Your N90 will always feel a little more head heavy than other 90's because it's got a denser string pattern.
tele
Hall of Fame
why would string density make it "feel" more head heavy? because of extra string weight?
Last edited:
Thanks, that helped a lot. I was able to take the bumper guard off without much issue, and I put 8 inches of lead under it on each side. That should roughly be +13 SW for an unstrung value of 306. After strings it should be pretty close to my goal of 335. Strung weight pre-overgrip came out to 12.6 ounces, and the balance was right around 8HL. I'll check the SW and TW on the Briffidi over the weekend when I have a little more time.
Also every time I see your black/red BLX paint job I get really mad that Wilson stopped making it.
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
Ehh could be a personal/mental thing. I've always viewed denser string pattern slower to its open pattern counterpart. But again, could be just a personal/mental thing because I "know" there are more strings to go through the air.
Probably a moot point. Haha
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
You mean the pattern?
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
The original BLX version and the original "Tour 90" are special to me because it was the only time the 90 came in a predominantly dark/black paintjob. Reminds me of the 6.0 85 days.
I doubt Wilson will ever re-release this paintjob. Despite it being probably the coolest looking one, it was Federer's least successful paintjob. Won the least majors with it and tennis craze didn't peak until after 2012 (Bloody Q-tip white paintjob).
(I personally think it's one of the better playing version too, along with the 2014 version)
Last edited:
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
Juuuuuuuuuuusssstttt going to gently put this here... hehehehe
I mean how the mains end at 10B and have to be tied off at 6B while the crosses end at 7B and have to be tied off at 9B or something like that. So many double-blocked holes. It's a nightmare to push strings though all the double blocked holes
tele
Hall of Fame
yeah, I can't say there is not a perceptible difference, though I do think the influence on actual head heaviness is negligible. either way, jealous that you have both drill patterns to compare!
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
Ha... I don't. The denser pattern worked with the 6.0 85 for me, but negative on the pre-K90 frames. I know it doesn't gel with me so I just don't bother getting them.
For me, it's the original BLX or the 2014 version.
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
Oh yeah I get it. Ehhh after a while, I stopped thinking about it.
I remembered when I got to my last few crosses that I used to use the Parnell Loop on the mains where after the 6th main you skip to the 8th main as the penultimate main and then finish with the 7th main because it's so much closer to the tie off. After I break the strings on the N90 I'll be sure to do that again. I just can't believe how badly Wilson chose the tie offs. Are all other Wilsons from that era this horrible, or was this special treatment for the Pro Staffs? They fixed their mistake when they got to the RF97, but it's so insane that after fixing the string spacing from the N90 and Tour 90 they still kept the horrible tie offs. That should have been a two birds with one stone moment.
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
I'm not sure. I mean I agree with you since I only do 2-piece stringing, the last tie off knot is always at a weird place.
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
Here is some more BLX90 goodness. Off topic, but I swear, Federer hit a bigger ball with the 90's than he did with the 97. I guess that's youth for you.
Not to mention, with the 90's, his forehand was practically automatic.
Not to mention, with the 90's, his forehand was practically automatic.
And even this forehand is the diminished version of his nCode era forehand where he threw his whole body into every forehand. If I may step on my Fedhead soap box for a moment, it really irritates me when people say that the best version of Federer is anything in the RF97 era. Roger's game was at its most lethal when his forehand was full of venom, and that was only with the 90, in particular the nCode era where he was throwing his whole body into every shot and using his long and high takeback. Anyone with eyes knows that he was blatantly lying when he said in 2015 that he was playing his best because his forehand wasn't anywhere close to the caliber he was striking it even in 2013 with a bad back. When Rafa says that 2017 was the best version of Roger he ever played, I can at least concede that his backhand had improved significantly in the matchup and just as importantly he got some rhythm back with the forehand (though it only lasted for that year), but Rafa is significantly discounting how little his own diminished movement factored into the losses. I think that 2004-2006 Roger with the 2017 mentality on the backhand is the theoretical best version of him, and when push comes to shove 2004-2006 trumps 2017 because 2004-2006 brought it for 100+ matches a year while 2017 couldn't even make it to 60 matches (including 0 on clay) thanks to the post-meniscus tear recovery and the bad back.
I finally got to hit with the N90s yesterday, and boy did I miss hitting with 90s. N90 is customized to what I call Fed-lite spec, low TW and high SW. I slapped 4 grams of lead under the bumper guard and put on an overgrip. I strung the racquet with Luxilon 1.30mm Natural gut in the mains at 51 lbs and Wilson Revolve 1.25mm in the crosses at 48lbs including prestretch on both. The strung and customized specs are 12.76oz/361.6g strung static weight, 9HL balance, 336.6 SW, and 13.7 TW. Roger's actual specs from what I recall were 360-365 SW, 12.9-13oz static weight, and 6-8HL balance.
Spin with the N90 is much tougher than I remember with the 2014 90, an definitely much tougher than with the PS85's open 16x18 pattern. When I strike the ball right, I get really good spin (especially on serve), but on forehand and backhand I need to fix my swing to find the topspin angle more consistently. Slices are really dirty and very easy to keep in the court. Flat shots are bullets. I just need to get comfortable with flattening out more often because I've been hitting with the RF97 for the past 10 months and I've lost the touch because of how clubby the RF97 is in the air. Defense is surprisingly easy despite the lower TW for the modern game because the mass is pretty high and the SW brings a strong response. The racquet moves through the air like a heavy scalpel, and I need to work on putting my body into my forehands more. I will say though that the only thing I want to do with this racquet is blast forehands. Serve+1 feels automatic. The sweet spot is also exceptionally comfortable to strike. I miss this response. I need to string up my PS85 for a side by side comparison, but I'll hold off on that until after I break the strings in the N90.
Overall I was able to play over 2 hours of singles without significant issue. My back is definitely feeling it after all the kick serves, but I still felt like I had enough gas in the tank for another 45 minutes or so. This is not a particularly demanding racquet to swing, and it feels quite a bit easier than the RF97.
Spin with the N90 is much tougher than I remember with the 2014 90, an definitely much tougher than with the PS85's open 16x18 pattern. When I strike the ball right, I get really good spin (especially on serve), but on forehand and backhand I need to fix my swing to find the topspin angle more consistently. Slices are really dirty and very easy to keep in the court. Flat shots are bullets. I just need to get comfortable with flattening out more often because I've been hitting with the RF97 for the past 10 months and I've lost the touch because of how clubby the RF97 is in the air. Defense is surprisingly easy despite the lower TW for the modern game because the mass is pretty high and the SW brings a strong response. The racquet moves through the air like a heavy scalpel, and I need to work on putting my body into my forehands more. I will say though that the only thing I want to do with this racquet is blast forehands. Serve+1 feels automatic. The sweet spot is also exceptionally comfortable to strike. I miss this response. I need to string up my PS85 for a side by side comparison, but I'll hold off on that until after I break the strings in the N90.
Overall I was able to play over 2 hours of singles without significant issue. My back is definitely feeling it after all the kick serves, but I still felt like I had enough gas in the tank for another 45 minutes or so. This is not a particularly demanding racquet to swing, and it feels quite a bit easier than the RF97.
I've been having this discussion w/ my friend on what year was peak Fed FH. I think if you're judging by peak power, winners, and angles that 04-06 FH was the best. But if you consider how early he's taking the ball and how he's hitting thru the court while still opening up angles here and there, 2017-2019 was better (watch his Basel 2017 and 2019 matches, 2019 Dubai, 2017 IW and Miami). His ball was still just as heavy or maybe even heavier with the RF97 due to the bigger headsize, it's just you don't see the winners from anywhere like his younger years.
He hit a more consistent rally ball, but he didn't have the goods to beat Djokovic anymore in slams after he traded in his forehand for a more protected backhand and stable volleys. The RF97 and camping the baseline helped him age gracefully by raising his floor relative to 2013, but he couldn't beat Djokovic in 2014-2016 and 2019 because he could no longer hit the greatest shot in the history of the sport.
naturalexponent
Legend
Agree with this. And I recall *feeling* like (I wish I could find stats) he was hitting more UEs off the forehand immediately after the switch (specifically hitting long), which is to be expected, but I'd be curious to know if this was a sustained trend.
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
Yeah no... of topic but honestly. Federer's forehand pre-06 were basically unplayable. The only one with a bigger and more penetrating forehand was Fernando Gonzales. But Federer's was practically automatic. I would even say his pony-tail days had bigger forehands than even his n-coded days. It's just one of things people forget Federer had.
You know how people were so surprised by how early he took the balls 2017 and on, and how often he came to the net? I'm always surprised Federer was almost a serve and volleyer with a baseline game that was increasingly suitable for the modern game. I'm like... "That's what he did on the tour in his younger days..." Same with his forehand.
His pre-06 forehands was as big as post-Rio Olympics Del Potro's forehand.
You know how people were so surprised by how early he took the balls 2017 and on, and how often he came to the net? I'm always surprised Federer was almost a serve and volleyer with a baseline game that was increasingly suitable for the modern game. I'm like... "That's what he did on the tour in his younger days..." Same with his forehand.
His pre-06 forehands was as big as post-Rio Olympics Del Potro's forehand.
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
I look around me, I look around my peers, I don't see anyone playing with an old Pro Staff, or even an old Prestige. I'm 40 now and I'm still fairly competitive in singles. But even my peers have moved onto "modern" racquets.
Most recently, my club JUST resurfaced its courts and and omg, it's so much slower and grippier... And it's getting me thinking, am I just stupid for not moving on to newer modern racquets?
(I have used the RF97 for a few years, it just doesn't feel natural in the air and so I went back... am I crazy?)
Most recently, my club JUST resurfaced its courts and and omg, it's so much slower and grippier... And it's getting me thinking, am I just stupid for not moving on to newer modern racquets?
(I have used the RF97 for a few years, it just doesn't feel natural in the air and so I went back... am I crazy?)
J011yroger
Talk Tennis Guru
Hah, same here.
Im 38, and while I love my PT57a and played the PC2.0 for many months after it came out....I constantly find myself drifting towards the modern frames.
My hitting partner is the same. He was playing Cx200 Tour and then the Prestige Pro...then he went Blade, and as of the other week is rocking the Vcore 98+
I think frames up to 320g stock are still perfectly viable. The 330g+ weight stock I think is harder to pull off in today's game, as with string + overgrip you're pushing too heavy IMO. Or rather, most people will get better results with the lighter more 'modern' frames.
I think the weight thing is just confirmation bias. You see more players have more success because of the economics of junior tennis. Academies make money by having their kids be successful earlier with easy to swing light racquets rather than later with harder to swing heavier racquets. Next thing you know, those 7 year old kids are 18 years old and have never seen the other side of 11.5 ounces strung. Now apply that to multiple generations of players on tour at the same time. There absolutely are advantages to modern racquets with regard to power and spin, but I will be shocked if these pros have healthy wrists and arms in their 30s from these featherweights.
I think its relative. I was insinuating more that frames from 305g-320g STOCK probably capture the bulk of the bell curve of rackets that people can use successfully at any level. There will always be outliers who use crazy high static weights, swing weights, etc.
I played a LEADED UP Pro Staff 85 in college. So I get it.
I would love some thin beam, high twist weight rackets.
Seth
Legend
I’m walking a similar road, but keep going back to the old school sticks. PT2.0 and PC2.0. Pretty sure I sold a PT2.0 to @Soundbyte before buying a couple more again.
That's probably true. I had 7 at one point...now down to 1. Had 3 PC2.0 at one point....down to one. But I have 2x PT57As and a PT280 now.
I actually much prefer the PC2.0 over the PT2.0. But the PT57A is very nice.
Seth
Legend
Agreed on the PC > PT. Both are great but the PC is just so easy to swing compared to the PT.
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
Thanks for the responses y'all... let me summarize:
You are not alone, lol
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
While I'm at a crossroad and contemplating a move to more modern, larger, and more powerful racquets, I found myself a new string set up.
In the past, I've always used Gut(m) x Kirschbaum Max Power 1.25(c). I always thought of Max Power as the hobo version of ALU Power but with better tension maintenance, and that it's just a place holder in the crosses. But it eventually got really boring because I just looked at it as a place holder in the crosses.
To satisfy my boredom, I started to explore different polys as a cross. I don't like to mess with my equipment, so I limited my curiosity to just 2-3 strings:
Hyper G Round - It was honestly an underwhelming experience. Maybe because I'm not putting it in the mains and thus not repping its full benefits and all the hype? But I thought this string was just meh. With a noticeable change in playability around the 6-8 hour mark.
Head Lynx TOUCH - This string would have been great because it's at a decent price, held tension decently well, accentuated the dwell time which I liked. But for some reason, it's got a thick coating. My gut mains were getting "stuck"
I recently switched to Yonex Poly Tour Strike 1.25 in the crosses and WOW. Quite a bit of a difference. I like that it is seemingly increasing the dwell time which I love. I've been through several racquets now and I can happily say there's no significant drop in playability and thus tension maintenance is quite good. I average about 12-16 hours before the gut mains snap and the stringbed remains consistent throughout.
CON:
This string is admittingly quite expensive to throw into the crosses. But I went on the Electronic BAY site and got myself a reel for about $160 so it helps with the cost.
In the past, I've always used Gut(m) x Kirschbaum Max Power 1.25(c). I always thought of Max Power as the hobo version of ALU Power but with better tension maintenance, and that it's just a place holder in the crosses. But it eventually got really boring because I just looked at it as a place holder in the crosses.
To satisfy my boredom, I started to explore different polys as a cross. I don't like to mess with my equipment, so I limited my curiosity to just 2-3 strings:
Hyper G Round - It was honestly an underwhelming experience. Maybe because I'm not putting it in the mains and thus not repping its full benefits and all the hype? But I thought this string was just meh. With a noticeable change in playability around the 6-8 hour mark.
Head Lynx TOUCH - This string would have been great because it's at a decent price, held tension decently well, accentuated the dwell time which I liked. But for some reason, it's got a thick coating. My gut mains were getting "stuck"
I recently switched to Yonex Poly Tour Strike 1.25 in the crosses and WOW. Quite a bit of a difference. I like that it is seemingly increasing the dwell time which I love. I've been through several racquets now and I can happily say there's no significant drop in playability and thus tension maintenance is quite good. I average about 12-16 hours before the gut mains snap and the stringbed remains consistent throughout.
CON:
This string is admittingly quite expensive to throw into the crosses. But I went on the Electronic BAY site and got myself a reel for about $160 so it helps with the cost.
If you end up migrating to anything modern, put the newest Black Ace Pro on your list.
Its the closest thing I've hit in a long time to even remotely compare to the old Head/Wilson frames.
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
I've checked it out. On specs alone, I don't think I would consider it. Sure, it's a larger headsize (don't think that's my problem), but at 19.5mm, and that flexible of a racquet, I'm not sure how much more power that'll give me.
I'll argue that my 90 with at 17mm and significantly stiffer racquet hits a bigger ball.
Also, headsize is not really an issue for me. I mean a 97 vs 90 is not that big of a difference. If I miss hit with a 90, it'll still be a miss hit on a 97. Which is why I don't understand why I can't gel with the RF97. Because it is the perfect replacement on paper.
Check Volkl C10 Pro
Did you hit with it tho? The Black Ace Pro is more pop than the ncode Tour 90. I hit them side by side with similar string setups.
I have one and have owned several of the variations over the years!
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
No, not yet, so I could very much be wrong.
But at this point, I don't see a reason to switch away from my 90.
Fair enough, you said you were contemplating a switch so I just wanted to throw out the suggestion!
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
Yeah, thank you though!
I'm only "contemplating" because I feel out of place when everyone I play against is using 97+ racquets, under 11ounces, and thick ass beams.
I'm basically surrounded by a sea of what would be considered as "tweener" in yester-years that's causing some self doubts.
Have you tried the TFight 315S? It's not terribly light and can be bumped up to a good weight with a leather grip. Plays very stable but super whippy in stock form (think like almost 85/90 fast through the air and with APD levels of stability). You get a stupid launch angle for when you want to hit loopy divebombs, but it also has a phenomenal sweet spot for when you want to flatten out. Good ball feel compared to the range (obviously not as good as the Wilson mids though). I had a tough time gelling with it on the backhand, but that was more just because I put it down in favor of my RF97 ans now N90. It still lives in my bag for days where the conditions are damp and I don't want to kill my gut stringbeds. Only major knock on the racquet is to terrible grip shape.
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
Then I won't even need to consider it, haha. Thanks!
It's a shame because aside from the rectangular grip shape it really is a great racquet. I'd consider it switchable if it had a Pro Staff-like handle.
Bender
G.O.A.T.
I’ve always thought that the N90 felt like a solid wooden plank in the head, like an elongated table tennis paddle, which feels really nice to hold and move around in the air, but far less fun to actually play with.
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
It's kind of weird why the original retail versions of Pro Staff Tour 90, and the N90 are different than the rest of the 6.0 85 and 90 family. The handle length and the throat of the Pro Staff Tour 90 and N90 are different than the rest.
Maybe that's why it feels like elongated to you? But hey, still a fine racquet and I really wish Wilson will make the Pro Staff 90 available again.
Similar threads
