The Official Angell Users Club

flanker2000fr

Professional
Funnily enough the TC95 63 RA was what I came from and before that the TC97. I'll not lie, although the 95 is a great racquet I'm not good enough any more to do it justice. if you have good movement, foot work and mechanics it will work for you but for an ageing player with bad knees who no longer moves that well it wasn't the best fit. The 100 is much more forgiving. With the 95 you get out what you put in, the 100 gives you a little more help.
Same here. I do love midsize frames around 95 sq.in., but the reality is that 98 or 100 sq.in. are markedly easier to play, and more realistic past 40.
 

Dan007

Hall of Fame
I find it very stable. The biggest problem for me was trying to tame the power.
Is it in the pure drive/aero territory? I heard it's powerful but controllable and hits a heavy ball. Some stock rackets like babolats have lots of inherent power but that doesn't necessarily equate to being heavy as well
 

Classic-TXP-IG MID

Hall of Fame
Thanks. Have you tried the TC97 16x19? That racket looks promising as well and heard it has more power than the K7 Red
I tried both the K7 Red and the TC97 16x19. TC97 definitely has more power and the control is excellent. I sold my K7 Red as I just couldn't gel with it and greatly prefered the TC lines (both 95 and 97 - of which I have both string patterns).

Hope that helps
 

tennis347

Professional
350g is a lot of weight, and I speak from experience having played the Prince Phantom 93P for 18 months, in singles and doubles. Though I too used to love hefty frames, I have gradually come down from this and the TC100 is around 334g strung with overgrip and dampener. It's markedly easier to play, and doesn't tire me as much in long games.
I totally agree with you. At 53, around 330 grams strung is enough weight to play with without getting tired or causing any injuries.
 

flanker2000fr

Professional
Is it in the pure drive/aero territory? I heard it's powerful but controllable and hits a heavy ball. Some stock rackets like babolats have lots of inherent power but that doesn't necessarily equate to being heavy as well
Not sure about the Babolat's, as I value my elbow too much to have played them much. But "heaviness" = ball speed + spin. So if you have a powerful racquet allowing you to achieve good ball speed, and that your mechanics are sound enough to allow you to impart good spin, you'd generate a heavy ball.
 
I'm now interested in the TC100 but I'm hearing mixed opinions about its stability. Do you find it stable?
One of the most stable frames I've played with in stock form.

Yes, the power level is not up for debate. They are both powerful rackets as I've played with both extensively. the 100 however is easier to play with than the 95.
Easier in what way? Would love to know more. I sometimes feel like my tc100 is too powerful and want to try a 95, and other times I love how powerful it is.
 
Is it in the pure drive/aero territory? I heard it's powerful but controllable and hits a heavy ball. Some stock rackets like babolats have lots of inherent power but that doesn't necessarily equate to being heavy as well
Its funny, yes the pure Aero helps generate more spin, but if you're not already hitting heavy balls it's like a fluffy spin which sits up and screams "hit me for a winner". This has been my experience playing against people who do use the pure Aero.

Pure drive gives easier depth and pace but probably harder to control. Zero feel.

The heaviest balls I've dealt with were from pure strikes, RFs, and a stock AI 98. Heaviest was the AI. All 3 are elite players, which goes to show racquets don't really mean much in the grand scheme of things.
 

Dan007

Hall of Fame
Its funny, yes the pure Aero helps generate more spin, but if you're not already hitting heavy balls it's like a fluffy spin which sits up and screams "hit me for a winner". This has been my experience playing against people who do use the pure Aero.

Pure drive gives easier depth and pace but probably harder to control. Zero feel.

The heaviest balls I've dealt with were from pure strikes, RFs, and a stock AI 98. Heaviest was the AI. All 3 are elite players, which goes to show racquets don't really mean much in the grand scheme of things.
Yea I feel ya. Given that the user can actually hit and has proper technique, there are still some rackets that hit a 'lighter' or I like to call empty balls and some hit a 'heavier one' but there are so many variables other than the racket itself. Weight, SW, strings, tension, etc. so it's difficult to pinpoint
 

Jouke

Semi-Pro
Is it in the pure drive/aero territory? I heard it's powerful but controllable and hits a heavy ball. Some stock rackets like babolats have lots of inherent power but that doesn't necessarily equate to being heavy as well
I think it has huge potential, but I havent been able to unlock it. Which probably most speaks for my impatience.
I feel if you hit with a lot of spin and dont try to paint the lines that the TC 100 is a lovely racket. It might give it a try with a low powered isospeed black fire and see..
 

tennis347

Professional
How do you have your K7 set up? Did you add any lead? How did it compare to your 16x19 blade v7? Thx!
Yes, I originally had 3 grams of lead total at 3 and 9 but then changed to 2 grams total at 2 and 10 to get a little more pop since I have tendency to hit higher in hoop. I generally use Gosen Micro at 55lbs which gives a nice soft feel. In terms of comparing to the Blade I would say the biggest difference is that the K7 Red is more forgiving and much easier to use. The spin potential is much greater with the K7 Red and the sweet spot has a more consistent feel with no hot spots. In terms of control, I would give a slight edge to the K7 Red where as with the Blade I find that there are hot spots and occasionally erratic control. The Blade has a bit more power and better plow. The Blade is also quite arm friendly and also has a nice feel. I gave up on the Blade because it is tough to generate heavy topspin and requires alot more precision on your strokes. The Blade doesn't match up with my topspin strokes. If you are flatter hitter the Blade will probably be a better fit. Hopefully this info helps you.
 

PigPen

Semi-Pro
Yes, I originally had 3 grams of lead total at 3 and 9 but then changed to 2 grams total at 2 and 10 to get a little more pop since I have tendency to hit higher in hoop. I generally use Gosen Micro at 55lbs which gives a nice soft feel. In terms of comparing to the Blade I would say the biggest difference is that the K7 Red is more forgiving and much easier to use. The spin potential is much greater with the K7 Red and the sweet spot has a more consistent feel with no hot spots. In terms of control, I would give a slight edge to the K7 Red where as with the Blade I find that there are hot spots and occasionally erratic control. The Blade has a bit more power and better plow. The Blade is also quite arm friendly and also has a nice feel. I gave up on the Blade because it is tough to generate heavy topspin and requires alot more precision on your strokes. The Blade doesn't match up with my topspin strokes. If you are flatter hitter the Blade will probably be a better fit. Hopefully this info helps you.
Did you purchase your K7 recently or is it the older softer version?
 

Jouke

Semi-Pro
Yes, I originally had 3 grams of lead total at 3 and 9 but then changed to 2 grams total at 2 and 10 to get a little more pop since I have tendency to hit higher in hoop. I generally use Gosen Micro at 55lbs which gives a nice soft feel. In terms of comparing to the Blade I would say the biggest difference is that the K7 Red is more forgiving and much easier to use. The spin potential is much greater with the K7 Red and the sweet spot has a more consistent feel with no hot spots. In terms of control, I would give a slight edge to the K7 Red where as with the Blade I find that there are hot spots and occasionally erratic control. The Blade has a bit more power and better plow. The Blade is also quite arm friendly and also has a nice feel. I gave up on the Blade because it is tough to generate heavy topspin and requires alot more precision on your strokes. The Blade doesn't match up with my topspin strokes. If you are flatter hitter the Blade will probably be a better fit. Hopefully this info helps you.
Thanks a lot again! I have my K7 red incoming next week. It will be the last Angell that I will try (untill Paul releases another magic stick :) ). Totally happy with my Ultra Tour right now (and 4 blades V7 in the bag), but I feel like I want to try the K7 red again. Last time I bought L4 grip which was too big. Bought the L3 now. Will report how I like it! I think I will slap 3g at 3/9 and 2g at 12.
 
Last edited:

tennis347

Professional
Thanks a lot again! I have my K7 red incoming next week. It will be the last Angell that I will try. Totally happy with my Ultra Tour right now (and 4 blades V7 in the bag), but I feel like I want to try the K7 red again. Last time I bought L4 grip which was too big. Bought the L3 now. Will report how I like it! I think I will slap 3g at 3/9 and 2g at 12.
Good luck with the K7 Red. As can see I prefer the K7 Red over the Blade v7 98 16 x 19, however you will have to decide.
 

Jouke

Semi-Pro
Good luck with the K7 Red. As can see I prefer the K7 Red over the Blade v7 98 16 x 19, however you will have to decide.
Yeah, my strokes and preferences have changed a little over time. I am hitting harder and therefore seem to like the control of 18x20 patterns more. But the K7 red (and your love expressions for it ;)) made me want to try it again.
 

smirker

Hall of Fame
One of the most stable frames I've played with in stock form.


Easier in what way? Would love to know more. I sometimes feel like my tc100 is too powerful and want to try a 95, and other times I love how powerful it is.
Looking at it objectively I get less mis hits with the 100 than I did with the 95, probably because I was not in the right position often enough to play a proper stroke. With the 100 a short stab (on the backhand side) is enough to get the ball back in play. As I said I have the 100 at 350g so a lot of extra power. That's just the way I like my frames. I don't get this thing of lowering weight as you get older. I'm 46 but no weaker than I was when I was in my 30's. As a 16 year old I swung a 13oz racket so i have actually reduced weight over the years! Got a Radical Tour candy cane on its way so another hefty frame to add to the collection. No mods required on that one.
 

smirker

Hall of Fame
350g is a lot of weight, and I speak from experience having played the Prince Phantom 93P for 18 months, in singles and doubles. Though I too used to love hefty frames, I have gradually come down from this and the TC100 is around 334g strung with overgrip and dampener. It's markedly easier to play, and doesn't tire me as much in long games.
Not really. I like the weight on return for blocking back a big serve or taking a cut at a weak serve. I play doubles so the extra weight is also beneficial for volleys. Put the racket in place and let the mass do the rest.
 

ollinger

G.O.A.T.
One of the most stable frames I've played with in stock form
let's be clear here that the TC100 is not ONE frame but MANY frames depending on the weight, balance and other specs one chooses. That said, I've played with a few versions of the frame up to 11 ounces (unstrung) and have never thought it was terribly stable compared with similar racquets on the market. Comfortable for sure (including the 70 RA versions), a very nice serving racquet, but not all that stable in those weights.
 

serveitup911

Semi-Pro
I’m going to be a new Angell user. I’m coming most recently from the Babolat Pure Drive Roddick + (2012) version I believe. I have it strung with Solinco Tour Bite 1.25. It was a great racquet for me when I was in top shape and form. In my college tennis days, I played a Wilson nBlade 106 and switched to the Roddick for more power on serves for playing Pro League in Charleston, SC. I am a few years and 2 kids and a wife older with a fraction of the playing time I used to have. I’m hoping for a more arm friendly experience.

I ordered 2 identically specced TCs. A 100 and a 101. They are 27.5”, 320g, 305 balance with hybrid grips in shape B 4 1/4. Octane paint. I am only 5’8” and have relatively small hands. The 100 is 70RA and the 101 is of course 66. I wasn’t sure which I would like better, so I will try both, sell one, and buy a 2nd of the one that fits me better.

In my junior tennis days, my favorite racquet was a Head i.Prestige MP XL. Just a few years ago, I was playing the best tennis of my life with the Roddick plus. I think the 101 will be more like the Prestige and the 100 will be more like the Drive. I have also played some Dunlops in the past and always liked the feel, and I know Paul likely designed them.

It should be a fun comparison!

I also ordered my dad a 105 at 27.5” and 300g 310 balance. 74 RA Octane. Grip B in 4 1/4. He’s about a 3.5 level player. He’s coming from some kind of Aero Babolat in standard length, but has always liked extended better.
 

haqq777

Legend
let's be clear here that the TC100 is not ONE frame but MANY frames depending on the weight, balance and other specs one chooses.
Not really. The static weight and balance for Angell racquets is adjusted by weight pallet system in the grip. The twist weight or the roll moment of inertia (taken as measure of stability of the racquet) will be the same for all configurations of a particular line (TC100 in this case) since all hairpins are same before pallet is attached. Different weight and balance will not affect the twistweight measurement unless you add weight to the hoop yourself.

That said, I've played with a few versions of the frame up to 11 ounces (unstrung) and have never thought it was terribly stable compared with similar racquets on the market. Comfortable for sure (including the 70 RA versions), a very nice serving racquet, but not all that stable in those weights.
I am currently using Babolat APDs rated at 14.05 twist weight by TWU and found the TC100 to be similar in stability. Never felt like I was being pushed around or that dreaded racquet flutter or twisting in hand and I hit regularly with good college players who generate a really heavy ball too. Which racquets currently in the market did you use that were similar spec (and 21 mm tapered beam) that feel more stable than TC100? Just curious to know.
 

Caol-ila

Rookie
the 95 is a great racquet I'm not good enough any more to do it justice. if you have good movement, foot work and mechanics it will work for you but for an ageing player with bad knees who no longer moves that well it wasn't the best fit. The 100 is much more forgiving. With the 95 you get out what you put in, the 100 gives you a little more help.
How true.
I love the TC95, but I am rarely able to play well with it. I am 65, end even I am quite in a good shape my legs are no longer up to the task. I am still able to run and sometimes even reach drop shots and get the point, but small movements are more and more difficult. 10 meter runs are OK, 20 times half a meter is too much and I often try to hit without moving my feet. The K7 red helps me a lot, but after a while and several contortions I change racquet in order to force me to hit properly. Then I go back to the K7red.
I have not hit my TC100 for a while, after leaving it for the TC95 and other Angells. Now I am starting to think it is time to go back to the origins and recover a stick more apt to my present state.
 

smirker

Hall of Fame
How true.
I love the TC95, but I am rarely able to play well with it. I am 65, end even I am quite in a good shape my legs are no longer up to the task. I am still able to run and sometimes even reach drop shots and get the point, but small movements are more and more difficult. 10 meter runs are OK, 20 times half a meter is too much and I often try to hit without moving my feet. The K7 red helps me a lot, but after a while and several contortions I change racquet in order to force me to hit properly. Then I go back to the K7red.
I have not hit my TC100 for a while, after leaving it for the TC95 and other Angells. Now I am starting to think it is time to go back to the origins and recover a stick more apt to my present state.
I've come full circle with Angell too. Started with the 100, then went to the 97 for a while then to 95 and now back to the 100. The 100 provides what I need for my game at this point although I do have a radical tour OS on its way as I want to give an OS a decent try having borrowed a mate's POG OS. We'll see but I won't be parting ways with the 100 just yet. Nice drop of whisky Caol-ila.
 

ollinger

G.O.A.T.
Not really. The static weight and balance for Angell racquets is adjusted by weight pallet system in the grip. The twist weight or the roll moment of inertia (taken as measure of stability of the racquet) will be the same for all configurations of a particular line (TC100 in this case) since all hairpins are same before pallet is attached
weight added in the pallets WILL increase twistweight as it's at a small but measurable distance from the longitudinal axis of the racquet. Of course, it won't increase it as much as weight added to the lateral aspects of the hoop.
 

haqq777

Legend
weight added in the pallets WILL increase twistweight as it's at a small but measurable distance from the longitudinal axis of the racquet. Of course, it won't increase it as much as weight added to the lateral aspects of the hoop.
Negligible. Same as change in swing weight when you add weight to handle. Adding weight (or pallet in this case) will obviously increase its recoil weight, but the twistweight significantly less/negligibly. If you hit a ball dead smack in the center of the head, the racquet will recoil, but not twist around its long axis. If you hit a ball and inch or so away from the axis toward the 3 o’clock or 9 o’clock side of the strung area, in addition to recoiling, the racquet will twist around its long axis. And we usually never really hit the ball dead smack in center all the time. That is where stability (or lack of) is felt by the user. Adding weight at handle (or at 12, the other end) will not change that feeling. Adding weight on sides will.
ProKennex Ki Q+ 5 Pro for example felt much more stable to me, has similar specs
Haven't used it so I will take your word for it but from my personal experience, the TC100 is in the realm of APD for stability (I can switch back and forth with not a lot of adjustments) and have never found it unstable.
 

Dan007

Hall of Fame
I’m going to be a new Angell user. I’m coming most recently from the Babolat Pure Drive Roddick + (2012) version I believe. I have it strung with Solinco Tour Bite 1.25. It was a great racquet for me when I was in top shape and form. In my college tennis days, I played a Wilson nBlade 106 and switched to the Roddick for more power on serves for playing Pro League in Charleston, SC. I am a few years and 2 kids and a wife older with a fraction of the playing time I used to have. I’m hoping for a more arm friendly experience.

I ordered 2 identically specced TCs. A 100 and a 101. They are 27.5”, 320g, 305 balance with hybrid grips in shape B 4 1/4. Octane paint. I am only 5’8” and have relatively small hands. The 100 is 70RA and the 101 is of course 66. I wasn’t sure which I would like better, so I will try both, sell one, and buy a 2nd of the one that fits me better.

In my junior tennis days, my favorite racquet was a Head i.Prestige MP XL. Just a few years ago, I was playing the best tennis of my life with the Roddick plus. I think the 101 will be more like the Prestige and the 100 will be more like the Drive. I have also played some Dunlops in the past and always liked the feel, and I know Paul likely designed them.

It should be a fun comparison!

I also ordered my dad a 105 at 27.5” and 300g 310 balance. 74 RA Octane. Grip B in 4 1/4. He’s about a 3.5 level player. He’s coming from some kind of Aero Babolat in standard length, but has always liked extended better.
Can you give us an update/review when you receive your racket and have a chance to play with it?
 

flanker2000fr

Professional
let's be clear here that the TC100 is not ONE frame but MANY frames depending on the weight, balance and other specs one chooses. That said, I've played with a few versions of the frame up to 11 ounces (unstrung) and have never thought it was terribly stable compared with similar racquets on the market. Comfortable for sure (including the 70 RA versions), a very nice serving racquet, but not all that stable in those weights.
I can only compare to racquets I have played extensively: the Yonex DR98 and the Prince Phantom Pro 100P have a similar static weight and balance as my TC100, and in both cases I felt compelled to add lead at 3 and 9 to improve the stability. Not so with the TC100. But I am sure that there are other frames out there that are similar or better in that department.
 

flanker2000fr

Professional
Looking at it objectively I get less mis hits with the 100 than I did with the 95, probably because I was not in the right position often enough to play a proper stroke. With the 100 a short stab (on the backhand side) is enough to get the ball back in play. As I said I have the 100 at 350g so a lot of extra power. That's just the way I like my frames. I don't get this thing of lowering weight as you get older. I'm 46 but no weaker than I was when I was in my 30's. As a 16 year old I swung a 13oz racket so i have actually reduced weight over the years! Got a Radical Tour candy cane on its way so another hefty frame to add to the collection. No mods required on that one.
Power to you if you can wield these frames. I am 50, strong physically, but if I am honest the feet aren't moving as fast as they used to, so I definitely needed the tolerance of a 100 frame vs. the midsize frames I used to play. As for weight, I am naturally powerful with a strong arm, but that in itself is an issue: I tend to use my strength, which is detrimental to staying relaxed through the shots. And then, as I tire, the arm tenses up more and more, which degrades the quality of my shots even further. I found that I manage to stay more relaxed through my shots with slightly less weight, and don't tire as quickly. But this is very personal, and other players might have a completely different experience.
 

smirker

Hall of Fame
Power to you if you can wield these frames. I am 50, strong physically, but if I am honest the feet aren't moving as fast as they used to, so I definitely needed the tolerance of a 100 frame vs. the midsize frames I used to play. As for weight, I am naturally powerful with a strong arm, but that in itself is an issue: I tend to use my strength, which is detrimental to staying relaxed through the shots. And then, as I tire, the arm tenses up more and more, which degrades the quality of my shots even further. I found that I manage to stay more relaxed through my shots with slightly less weight, and don't tire as quickly. But this is very personal, and other players might have a completely different experience.
Former rugby player here too. I find the 100 weighted up helps make up for some of my lack of movement. Had two cartilage ops so I just can't run like I used to. With a heavy racket I can put it in the right place and the mass does the rest without me having to be in the perfect position.
 

flanker2000fr

Professional
Former rugby player here too. I find the 100 weighted up helps make up for some of my lack of movement. Had two cartilage ops so I just can't run like I used to. With a heavy racket I can put it in the right place and the mass does the rest without me having to be in the perfect position.
Sorry to hear about the operations. Rugby is a wonderful sport, but eventually one does pay the wear and tear it induces down the line. Had my fair share of bumps and bruises and joints issues (shoulder, ankle, knee, lower back), but thankfully never had to go under the knife, so I can still plod along OK.

What you say makes sense: if mobility is going to be reduced, you might as well try to shorten the point by flattening out a big ball. The 93P was doing this for me, but sadly I couldn't achieve enough consistency with it if the game went longer than I liked. But, incidentally, I am thinking along the same lines now in trying to shorten the points, especially on serve, which is naturally a strong shot. Hence the search for a very good serving racquet, to maximize my strong suit. This was one of my draws to the TC100, having read the feedback on this board.

I see you are based in Cambridge, and seeing that my wife is a Clare College alumni, I might find myself in your neck of the woods someday. It would be lovely to have a hit, if / when that happens.
 

ed70

Professional
I totally agree with you. At 53, around 330 grams strung is enough weight to play with without getting tired or causing any injuries.
Yeh same here I’m 49 & played the TC97 16x19 for 4 years. 310g unstrung & 326-330g depending on strings. Racquet is solid At those specs, no weight needed & can keep RHS fast.
 

Caol-ila

Rookie
I've come full circle with Angell too. Started with the 100, then went to the 97 for a while then to 95 and now back to the 100. The 100 provides what I need for my game at this point although I do have a radical tour OS on its way as I want to give an OS a decent try having borrowed a mate's POG OS. We'll see but I won't be parting ways with the 100 just yet. Nice drop of whisky Caol-ila.
Believe me, I haven't drunk a single drop of whisky in the last six months. It was not a decision, it came naturally. No wine, no grappa, just beer. Bitter. I accept suggestions.

Yesterday I decided to play my TC100. During the warm-up I found it a little too powerful, but comfortable. Then I started trying serves, and it was a revelation. I immediately served well, and the trend went on during the match. Several first serves inside, NO DOUBLE FAULTS. Hard to believe. On the opposite hand, it was quite difficult to keep the ball inside the court, not to speak about my net game. I soon lost confidence in my shots and started playing centrally, which forced me to run a lot (I like running). I lost the first set 7-6. I changed racquet, taking my beloved K7red, and immediately put some winners. Then my game collapsed. Several double faults, lots of mistakes. I went 1-5 in a few minutes. What happened with my trusty K7red? I took my TC100 and went to 4-5, also cancelling a dozen of match points. Then I lost 4-6.

Now I am in troubles. I love the K7red maneuvrability, sensibility, control, precision, comfort, but I also like winning. I think that after a couple of hours I shall have more control on my TC100 shots, hoping not to loose yesterday's serve. Then I could switch to the TC100, just as it happened switching from my TC95 to my K7red.

That's sad.


PS I love stinky whisky. In italian we say torbato, that maybe is peaty.
 

smirker

Hall of Fame
Believe me, I haven't drunk a single drop of whisky in the last six months. It was not a decision, it came naturally. No wine, no grappa, just beer. Bitter. I accept suggestions.

Yesterday I decided to play my TC100. During the warm-up I found it a little too powerful, but comfortable. Then I started trying serves, and it was a revelation. I immediately served well, and the trend went on during the match. Several first serves inside, NO DOUBLE FAULTS. Hard to believe. On the opposite hand, it was quite difficult to keep the ball inside the court, not to speak about my net game. I soon lost confidence in my shots and started playing centrally, which forced me to run a lot (I like running). I lost the first set 7-6. I changed racquet, taking my beloved K7red, and immediately put some winners. Then my game collapsed. Several double faults, lots of mistakes. I went 1-5 in a few minutes. What happened with my trusty K7red? I took my TC100 and went to 4-5, also cancelling a dozen of match points. Then I lost 4-6.

Now I am in troubles. I love the K7red maneuvrability, sensibility, control, precision, comfort, but I also like winning. I think that after a couple of hours I shall have more control on my TC100 shots, hoping not to loose yesterday's serve. Then I could switch to the TC100, just as it happened switching from my TC95 to my K7red.

That's sad.


PS I love stinky whisky. In italian we say torbato, that maybe is peaty.
I'm in the wine business so get through a fair bit of nice wine. Also partial to a whisky and a beer. Makes me sound like an alcoholic I'm not really, most weeks I doubt I drink my weekly allowance but when I do have a drink it's something nice. If you like peaty whisky then try Lagavullin, Laphroaig, or Bruichladdich. Ardbeg is another good one. For beer I like Adnams bitters, especially their IPAs .For rackets I'm pretty much using the TC 100 exclusively now with the odd dabble with classic Head frames. I have just reduced the weight in mine by 20g to try and generate some more rhs. Not hit with them yet so may go back to 350g of course.
 

tennis347

Professional
Believe me, I haven't drunk a single drop of whisky in the last six months. It was not a decision, it came naturally. No wine, no grappa, just beer. Bitter. I accept suggestions.

Yesterday I decided to play my TC100. During the warm-up I found it a little too powerful, but comfortable. Then I started trying serves, and it was a revelation. I immediately served well, and the trend went on during the match. Several first serves inside, NO DOUBLE FAULTS. Hard to believe. On the opposite hand, it was quite difficult to keep the ball inside the court, not to speak about my net game. I soon lost confidence in my shots and started playing centrally, which forced me to run a lot (I like running). I lost the first set 7-6. I changed racquet, taking my beloved K7red, and immediately put some winners. Then my game collapsed. Several double faults, lots of mistakes. I went 1-5 in a few minutes. What happened with my trusty K7red? I took my TC100 and went to 4-5, also cancelling a dozen of match points. Then I lost 4-6.

Now I am in troubles. I love the K7red maneuvrability, sensibility, control, precision, comfort, but I also like winning. I think that after a couple of hours I shall have more control on my TC100 shots, hoping not to loose yesterday's serve. Then I could switch to the TC100, just as it happened switching from my TC95 to my K7red.

That's sad.


PS I love stinky whisky. In italian we say torbato, that maybe is peaty.
Changing to a different racquet in the middle of a match can have a negative impact on your mental game. I also enjoy changing racquets but at the end of the day it doesn't help you play your best tennis. That's why I have sold off most of my racquets and only have a pair of the Prince Phantom 100p and K7 Red. The Phantom 100p is now my lead because it does everything well for my game and increases my confidence on the court. The K7 Red is great racquet but falls short on put away power with precision. The K7 Red will always stay in the bag but I am done switching racquets. Happy hitting!
 

Dan007

Hall of Fame
Hey guys so I'm having trouble hearing back from Paul or Angell's fb messages. So if I were to get TC100 in 70RA, as 310grams and 315mm(9 pt HL) or 320grams and 315mm what would the approximate SW be? I like hefty rackets static weight wise but not so much in the SW department. I would like to keep just under 330, so SW in 320's would be good.
 

emhtennis

Semi-Pro
I think most standard length Angell TCs are apx 295 SW unstrung which translates to 325SW strung. Weight and balance choice will not affect this.

Stock swingweight will increase if you choose extended length frames.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
 

Dan007

Hall of Fame
I think most standard length Angell TCs are apx 295 SW unstrung which translates to 325SW strung. Weight and balance choice will not affect this.

Stock swingweight will increase if you choose extended length frames.

Sent from my SM-G981U using Tapatalk
Thanks. Yea I'm sticking to standard 27in. I heard it's about 325-330 which is right in my wheelhouse
 

JLaw516

New User
I’m looking at purchasing a K7 Lime and I’ve been reading that it’s grip size is larger than the custom line. I have a TC 100 with a #3 C grip and it feels perfect. I know the shape is slightly different but is the grip size just marginally bigger or a whole size bigger? Thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

flanker2000fr

Professional
Hey guys so I'm having trouble hearing back from Paul or Angell's fb messages. So if I were to get TC100 in 70RA, as 310grams and 315mm(9 pt HL) or 320grams and 315mm what would the approximate SW be? I like hefty rackets static weight wise but not so much in the SW department. I would like to keep just under 330, so SW in 320's would be good.
My TC100 is 63RA / 310g / 315mm and Paul measured the SW at 297 unstrung. So it's probably 325 - 327 strung with my usual set up of Solinco Confidential 16.
 
TC101 at 27.5" length 310g/9pt HL Review update: Played again with my new TC101 extended racket. This is my 5th time playing, it honestly is getting better and better for me and no arm issues so far, it feels so comfortable. Feel I can control my serves really well and volleys with this racket are amazing. I do find I have to generate the power but that is the same with my DR98+ previously so no change there. My slice backhands have improved immensely with this racket. I am loving this racket so far. The control on this is great, and as its a 101 it seems to have given me a bit more room for mishits which really helps :). I have yet to get my drop shot consistently right on this however I think that is down to my rustiness and not the racket as the feel on this racket is good. Thinking I may get another one if there is flash sale for it one day, maybe a lighter version at 300g 6pt HL, let me know views on this.
 

Dan007

Hall of Fame
My TC100 is 63RA / 310g / 315mm and Paul measured the SW at 297 unstrung. So it's probably 325 - 327 strung with my usual set up of Solinco Confidential 16.
That's strange cause I thought the 63RA was supposed to have a higher SW. It's almost the same as 70RA 310g / 315mm
 
Top