A non-technical TC99 review with along rambling intro:
I’m a mid-50s overweight and doubles match playing club player who started playing in my early 30s. I’m probably somewhere between a 4.0 and 4.5 on a good day. Maybe 4 sessions of coaching in all and mostly self-taught – I wish that when I started that YouTube had had as much of the quality tennis coaching videos that it has now. A shout out here for Intuitive Tennis.
Past racquets include the Head Radical, Head Prestige then onto the Wilson Kfactor Six.One 95, then right (dominant) shoulder reconstruction so dropping down in weight to the Pro Staff 97 v10 then v13.
I really liked the Wilson racquets when I was “on it” and the best I ever played was with the Six.One when I was younger and lighter. When I wasn’t “on it” they were horrendous. This fits pretty much with what everyone says – you have to have sound technique and be aggressive with it. What goes unsaid is that you also have to have good athleticism, great hand/eye co-ordination and reactions in order to get in place in time to unload.
I’ve reached the point where I need a bit more help from my bat as, quite frankly, the Pro Staff line-up is too demanding for my level. I demo’d the Babolat Pure Drive 100 (which I liked), Pure Strike 100 (which I liked more), Pro Staff X (just no) and RF01. I didn’t like the RF01 at all even after several hits. Nothing objective but it just didn’t sit right with me. It may have had too tight strings or something but anyway it wasn’t for me.
Onto the TC99. There are no demos available and in the UK there doesn’t seem to be the same knowledge base about Angell racquets as in the US. To buy any Angell racquet is therefore a leap of faith. So, I went to see them as I only live 20 or so miles away. I had a great chat with Paul Angell and my takeaway from the chat is that he knows what he is doing. So much so that I took that leap of faith and ordered 2 racquets.
Technical stuff – my simple explanation but go do your own research:
Foam-filled… I have no idea if this is a good thing or not. Blurb on the interweb says it can dampen vibration so produce a more solid feel. Others say it dampens the feel too much. It is probably a subjective thing but I suspect that it helps counter fatigue if you are hitting “hard” (whatever that means at whatever level you’re at) for a long period or playing several times per week.
Stiffness… The stiffer a racquet the greater the power. Stiffer does not equate to elbow pain.
Beam… Beam width does not equate to power. Beam width is often a feature of carbon lay-up, so if you use less carbon layers you need a bigger area to produce enough strength to counter stringing tensions.
Strings… Less strings = more power but less control. More strings = less power and more control. It seems that spin is only slightly affected by the number of strings and much more by technique and racquet head speed. The string spacing has an impact so 16x19 on a 100 racquet would be wider than on a 90. Most racquets seem to have very slightly wider spacing towards the outside of the hoop with tighter spacing in the middle. The change in spacing on the RF01 is very notice able so you have to hit in the sweet spot every time or things get a bit… random.
Launch angle… How high a ball goes relative to the angle of the strings. A higher launch means the ball goes higher for a given string angle etc. I don’t understand why this might be a consideration as you can always just hit the ball slightly higher or lower by changing your swing. It just takes time to re-train muscle memory.
Grip pallet… The shape of the handle.
Quality control… How accurate is the manufacturing compared to the stated specs. I have 2 TC99s and they both weigh 320g grams unstrung, the balance point is the same and the swing weights were (from memory so I may be wrong) are 324 and 325. Whatever it actually is there is a 1 point difference. To put this into context, I have 2 Pro Staff 97 v13s both with the exact same setup. They are 10g apart in weight (345g and 355g strung with over-grip and dampener) and 1.5cm apart in balance point. I can’t recall what the difference was in swing weight, but it does explain why I preferred one (the heavier and more head light one) over the other! It is also worth pointing out that brand size or name does not equate to quality. Angell racquets are made in the same places as larger brands but the quality control seems higher.
Onto my bats:
My TC99s are 320g at 10 points head light. I went for a leather strap and an important note is that the racquet weight takes account of the leather strap. Otherwise, I’d have gone for a 310g or 315g. With strings, an over-grip and an O ring dampener they both weigh 350g.
I went with grip B at size L4. This matches my Pro Staffs though the TC99 grip feels slightly larger. This may be because I never change the underlying leather grip, preferring to use over-grips, and the Pro Staff grips have probably compressed. If I ultimately decide to go down a grip size, I can get the pallet changed.
Strings are Babolat RPM Team at 53lbs. I do have a dampener as I prefer the muted sound to the twang of ball on strings.
The TC99 is essentially a React MPP 99 with a foam filled hoop though with more weight/balance options available to you than the React custom.
The review bit:
I play better with my TC99s than I do with my Pro Staffs. That’s the simple take away.
The slightly larger head side gives me more consistency especially with slightly off-centre hits. Despite a larger head size my accuracy (such as it is) is not diminished, probably because of the 18x19 string pattern.
The power seems a touch higher. Not so much that it is uncontrollable but it translates to more depth and speed through the court. It helps a great deal on back foot defensive shots especially with my 1h backhand. Zero technique leaning back forehands go a looooong way out.
Returns of serve go deeper. My racquet take back on a return is often too great but now I just block and I get it deep.
There is noticeably greater spin especially on a slice. I don’t know why as I am using the same technique. It may be the strings as I have swapped from whatever I used before. It may also be because it is a slightly thinner beam so I am getting more head speed, though the difference may only be very slight.
The whole “feel” is that it is more solid. This might be because of the foam-filled hoop or even just because the racquet size is larger so I have less off-centre hits.
There is a caveat to the whole playing better thing. I am still getting dialled in to the change in balance compared to my favoured Pro Staff. What this means is that I am still dialling in my 1h backhand topspin shots as they do not “feel” as if they are consistently deep enough. Objectively they are probably just as good, but in my head, they are not quite there yet.
I also do not have the confidence in serving that I had with my Pro Staff. Again, I think that this is due to the change in balance but if I’m being honest, I think that focus and intensity haven’t been there. When I try to do it right the serve is good. My kick serve has gone walkabout though so I may have to have a 5th coaching session to get it back.
Regarding aesthetics, I am very much of the belief that if you feel good you play better, so this is all subjective.
I like a thin racquet as it just feels right to me.
I am not such a fan of the paint job. I like oranges and reds but would much prefer a matt paint job. It has been a real wrench to move away from the matt black of the Pro Staffs. On balance, if I could have had the specs I have but with the React paint job then that’s what I’d have gone for.
The new K7 though. Paul kindly showed me one with the new paint job. Fabulous.
The TC99 does not make me a better player, but I play better tennis with it. If I were inclined to get fitter, coached and practice more then I’d be a better player. As always, technique is king.
I like it. A lot.
