The Prince Phantom 93P is a gift to us from TW - My Review/AMA

dgoran

Hall of Fame
I think he is saying 93p cannot be used at higher levels of the game (6-7) which on this forum and literary in real life non existent.
One does not need rating at those level nor you will ever find anyone saying i'm 6.0 lol.

Not to even talk about their ability with ANY racquet...
 

Power Player

Talk Tennis Guru
Boubi has been saying ridiculous stuff on these boards for quite a while now. I dont even know why someone would worry about competing at 6.0 level with a frame when they will never attain it.

You can compete at a high level in rec tennis with the 93P. It will boil down to what style you want on the court, but I see great players still using old pro staffs.
 

Classic-TXP-IG MID

Hall of Fame
I think he is saying 93p cannot be used at higher levels of the game (6-7) which on this forum and literary in real life non existent.
One does not need rating at those level nor you will ever find anyone saying i'm 6.0 lol.

Not to even talk about their ability with ANY racquet...
I'm pretty sure that if Nadal, Djokovic, Federer etc grabbed the 93P, blindfolded themselves on one eye, and gave most of us (including Boubi) a 4-0 lead, they would still kick our asses 6-4 6-0 6-0... it ain't got nothing to do with the racquet... technique, fitness, and general ability is what matters, the racquet can make the experience a bit more pleasant or preferable, but that's about it.

Those guys I mentioned (and pretty much any higher level player - skill wise), would come off the court saying they prefer more stiffness. or plushness in their racquet, or a different string setup, or balance, but they would still kick ass even with a kids aluminium Kmart special.

People just need excuses.

You can compete at a high level in rec tennis with the 93P. It will boil down to what style you want on the court, but I see great players still using old pro staffs.
@Power Player I completely agree with what you're saying... I just want to add that high level players can grab any racquet and play any style with it. They would just adjust their game and shot selection in order to make sure they can execute the game plan.

What I mean by that is that they would hit deeper, or with more spin, or RHS etc in order to get you (the opponent) out of position ad be able to finish the point. Federer pretty much showed that for years playing with the Pro Staff 90 against all the same players. The reason he made the switch is because he is getting older and that fraction of a difference at that level has helped him stay at the top. He could grab that same PS90 ad go whoop some Futures Players ass or someone outside the Top 200(?).

That's just my 2 cents worth.
 

mhkeuns

Hall of Fame
The 93” sounds intimidating until some comparisons were made with other frames which varied from 95 to 100. It was apparently clear that both Spectrum Comp and 93P are Midsize frames most people fear of using. Comparing them to any 95” frames, I couldn’t find any difference. Even comparing them to the Pro Staff 97S, the hitting surface was almost identical. Some of the 98” & 100” frames offered more room in the lower part of the head near the bridge area, but the actual hitting surface difference was minimal.
The 93P is an awesome frame. We switched or put the 93P in the bag for now not because we don’t like the stick anymore, Most of us are holics who seek to try the newest,.. That’s all.
 

Tommy Haas

Hall of Fame
I figured out why I don't hit a 2HBH as well as a one hander. It's because I hit flat ground strokes on both sides, and the small head and small spin window doesn't affect me. But for some reason I have a topspin 2HBH stroke and I need the larger margins of a bigger head with larger spin window. My natural shot on the backhand side is a one hander, so a 2HBH behind my backup shot could also be a factor.

I need to save my arm and will go 2HBH full time. It does make hitting high balls easier. I'm not Wawrinka and don't have the upper body strength to pound high one handers and have to slice it down. My only concern with buying the new PP100 18x20 is the flex. I like the ~55RA, but am afraid that I'll get dud that's closer to 59RA.
 

Boubi

Rookie
So you are saying that in their primes Pete Sampras and Ivan Lendl couldn't beat a modern 5.5 player using a Pure Aero?

It wasn't the racquet frame size that changed tennis, it was the polyester strings.

People are just so enamored with Nadal level topspin that they think its the only way to play. But there are pros winning with flatter shots like Del Potro. And to counter a lot of the topspin baseliners, you are seeing resurgence of slice and drop shots (all of which are easier to hit with frames like the 93P).

While I doubt we ever see pros dropping frame sizes to 93P levels again, plenty are still making a living with 95 sq in frames that are no wider than the 93P. Plenty of 4.5-5.0 senior level players using PS90's and 6.1 95's at our club too.

93P is good enough for anyone not making a living at tennis. At every other level there is always someone better than you and always someone worse than you. You win based on whether you are playing the better player or the worse player, not based on your racquet.

It comes down to feel and playstyle. If you like controlling points, being aggressive all over the court, playing a mix of finesse and pace, it's a good racquet. If you like standing 6 feet behind the baseline hitting loopy topspin groundies until someone misses, there are plenty of more fun racquets out there for that style.
Never said a pro could not beat a 5.5 with pure aero...Where is this written ?
But show me a pro using a 93P...Del Potro uses a 97 if I am not mistaken
I maintain this racquet will never suit fast rallies as we have now, no matter game style, feel, agressiveness
If that racquet was ok fo high level play, why not use 65 inches wooden racquets ?
 

Boubi

Rookie
Boubi has been saying ridiculous stuff on these boards for quite a while now. I dont even know why someone would worry about competing at 6.0 level with a frame when they will never attain it.

You can compete at a high level in rec tennis with the 93P. It will boil down to what style you want on the court, but I see great players still using old pro staffs.
Which ridiculous stuff ? Example(s) please
Interesting to see that the great players of this forum can't face reality: if they like to use this racquet it is because they have never faced real fast game
 

Power Player

Talk Tennis Guru
Which ridiculous stuff ? Example(s) please
Interesting to see that the great players of this forum can't face reality: if they like to use this racquet it is because they have never faced real fast game

No its you have clearly not faced a real fast game, and that statement is just another sample of how you say ridiculous things backed by zero real world information. You have also recently stated that most players don’t notice a difference in tension in 10#s. Can only assume you are speaking for yourself, because about anyone I know who hits the ball at a decent level notices a difference between 40 and 50 pounds. You live in your head and make the rules there, but they don’t apply to everyone else in the real world.

You keep coming in here and making rules that X player can’t use certain frames at certain levels. Thats just your own inexperience talking. If you actually played great players, you would see them using all sorts of different frames. There are high level players who never switched from their old pro staffs. Are you going to tell them they can’t use that frame based on your little math equation that you made up in your mind?

And again, your only argument is that you don’t see a pro using a 93P. You were saying that months ago and getting told how stupid it was, but again you come back to it since its your only point. We literally just said that the pro game doesn’t apply to anyone here, but you glossed over that only to vomit up the same tired and irrelevant argument.

Just stop telling people all the little rules you made up to make yourself feel better about your tennis game. It’s tiring and based on all the different responses you are getting, you should have a clue that no one cares by now.
 

Dartagnan64

Legend
Never said a pro could not beat a 5.5 with pure aero...Where is this written ?
But show me a pro using a 93P...Del Potro uses a 97 if I am not mistaken
I maintain this racquet will never suit fast rallies as we have now, no matter game style, feel, agressiveness
If that racquet was ok fo high level play, why not use 65 inches wooden racquets ?
Plenty of pros 2 decades ago used 85-90 sq in frames and had games that would beat any 6.0 with a modern Pure Aero is what I'm talking about.

What i'd like to know is why it matters at all what a pro uses? None of us play like pros, play against pros or make money playing tennis. I play against guys in the 3.0-4.5 ranges. I just need a racquet that can play against those guys, feel comfortable and allow me to play with confidence. 93P checks the boxes of comfort, control, and feel. That makes up for its minor lack of forgiveness.

And I've recently played with 65 inch wooden racquet and played well enough that my opponents told me I should stick with that frame, warps and all. It was that experience that taught me it's a lot less about the frame and more about the turkey at the other end. Biggest issue with mids and smaller is the lack of spin, but insane spin is really only needed at the highest levels of the game. Plenty of flat hitting high level 40-50 year olds in my neck of the woods. They compete just fine.
 

nick102potter

New User
Never said a pro could not beat a 5.5 with pure aero...Where is this written ?
But show me a pro using a 93P...Del Potro uses a 97 if I am not mistaken
I maintain this racquet will never suit fast rallies as we have now, no matter game style, feel, agressiveness
If that racquet was ok fo high level play, why not use 65 inches wooden racquets ?
Del Potro uses a 95. He still uses 6.1 95 under PJ if I'm not mistaken. Djokovic also uses a 95 with his prostock PT113B. Shapovalov also uses a 95 with his SV95 and Wawrinka with his VC95D. Honestly 93 and 95 are not much different size wise tbh.

You won't see pros using 93P because how many pros are sponsored by Prince now? Not much nowadays.
 

Classic-TXP-IG MID

Hall of Fame
Del Potro uses a 95. He still uses 6.1 95 under PJ if I'm not mistaken. Djokovic also uses a 95 with his prostock PT113B. Shapovalov also uses a 95 with his SV95 and Wawrinka with his VC95D. Honestly 93 and 95 are not much different size wise tbh.

You won't see pros using 93P because how many pros are sponsored by Prince now? Not much nowadays.
Completely agree with you.

Don't forget Murray uses a 95 (PT57A2), Kohlschreiber uses a 6.1 95, as does Roberto Bautista Agut and several WTA players, Cilic plays a 95, and many other Pros do as well.

As you have said, when you place a 93 sq in racquet over a 95, there is not much difference and if your shot was so way off that you're hitting the ball with the frame, you would have done it with both (or at least had a very badly timed shot with the 95 that would also go wayward and off target). Once you (the player in general - not you specifically) see that, and understand the difference is so small, you realise that it's all in your head and that keeping your eye on the ball would yield much better results than thinking it's the racquet's fault.

When Federer gets nervous and tense, I think he still shanks a similar amount of balls with his RF97A as with the PS90. Still froze at Wimbledon and lost, as he did in several US Opens. Same guy, different racquets, same result. It's between the ears, which includes confidence to go for your shots and step into your backhand (which he does now, but didn't do against Rafa in the past). Plus, this is Federer we're talking about and not some rec player (which most of us are - so makes even less difference).

Just saying...
 

Boubi

Rookie
No its you have clearly not faced a real fast game, and that statement is just another sample of how you say ridiculous things backed by zero real world information. You have also recently stated that most players don’t notice a difference in tension in 10#s. Can only assume you are speaking for yourself, because about anyone I know who hits the ball at a decent level notices a difference between 40 and 50 pounds. You live in your head and make the rules there, but they don’t apply to everyone else in the real world.

You keep coming in here and making rules that X player can’t use certain frames at certain levels. Thats just your own inexperience talking. If you actually played great players, you would see them using all sorts of different frames. There are high level players who never switched from their old pro staffs. Are you going to tell them they can’t use that frame based on your little math equation that you made up in your mind?

And again, your only argument is that you don’t see a pro using a 93P. You were saying that months ago and getting told how stupid it was, but again you come back to it since its your only point. We literally just said that the pro game doesn’t apply to anyone here, but you glossed over that only to vomit up the same tired and irrelevant argument.

Just stop telling people all the little rules you made up to make yourself feel better about your tennis game. It’s tiring and based on all the different responses you are getting, you should have a clue that no one cares by now.
Hahaha, you are the real loco of the forum man !
That being said, and this is based on real data, real experience, not on your type of boasting, yes, few players can distinguish two tensions even separated by 10 lbs...
And this is just one of the numerous misconceptions you and other self proclaimed ''good players'' are baring in their minds
 

Boubi

Rookie
Plenty of pros 2 decades ago used 85-90 sq in frames and had games that would beat any 6.0 with a modern Pure Aero is what I'm talking about.

What i'd like to know is why it matters at all what a pro uses? None of us play like pros, play against pros or make money playing tennis. I play against guys in the 3.0-4.5 ranges. I just need a racquet that can play against those guys, feel comfortable and allow me to play with confidence. 93P checks the boxes of comfort, control, and feel. That makes up for its minor lack of forgiveness.

And I've recently played with 65 inch wooden racquet and played well enough that my opponents told me I should stick with that frame, warps and all. It was that experience that taught me it's a lot less about the frame and more about the turkey at the other end. Biggest issue with mids and smaller is the lack of spin, but insane spin is really only needed at the highest levels of the game. Plenty of flat hitting high level 40-50 year olds in my neck of the woods. They compete just fine.
Exactly what I am saying by the way....this 93p perfectly suits 3-4.5 levels
 

Power Player

Talk Tennis Guru
Hahaha, you are the real loco of the forum man !
That being said, and this is based on real data, real experience, not on your type of boasting, yes, few players can distinguish two tensions even separated by 10 lbs...
And this is just one of the numerous misconceptions you and other self proclaimed ''good players'' are baring in their minds
Again, you have said nothing with any substance behind it.

Please show us your real data and real experience. Have you hit with members from here? Video of your game? What is real data to you?

It’s funny how you dismiss my “real data” as boasting, yet you do that exact thing and yours is somehow legitimate?

You literally prove my point every time you post a response.
 

Boubi

Rookie
Again, you have said nothing with any substance behind it.

Please show us your real data and real experience. Have you hit with members from here? Video of your game? What is real data to you?

It’s funny how you dismiss my “real data” as boasting, yet you do that exact thing and yours is somehow legitimate?

You literally prove my point every time you post a response.
R. Cross and R. Boxer, Measurements of string tension in a tennis racquet, Sports Engineering, 165-175,(2001)

11 of 18 (61%) satellite players could not pick a difference of 11 lbs

23 of 41 (56%…) recreational players could not feel any difference
 

Power Player

Talk Tennis Guru
R. Cross and R. Boxer, Measurements of string tension in a tennis racquet, Sports Engineering, 165-175,(2001)

11 of 18 (61%) satellite players could not pick a difference of 11 lbs

23 of 41 (56%…) recreational players could not feel any difference
Old data that still proves you are wrong anyway.

Ill quote you - "few players can distinguish two tensions even separated by 10 lbs" - but yet you just posted data that shows almost half of rec players could. That's not what "few" means.
 

Addxyz

Semi-Pro
R. Cross and R. Boxer, Measurements of string tension in a tennis racquet, Sports Engineering, 165-175,(2001)

11 of 18 (61%) satellite players could not pick a difference of 11 lbs

23 of 41 (56%…) recreational players could not feel any difference
Same article? http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/~cross/PUBLICATIONS/22. Player sensitivity.pdf

I actually don't see a place he mentions satellite players or recreational players. Also, the "top grade players" he mentions play only once or twice a week. Not really sure of the level of players there. Highly suspect to me.
 

mhkeuns

Hall of Fame
Funny how much hate the 93P gets because no pros use it. I could.be wrong, but if it was called Babolat, Head or Wilson Phantom 93P, it definitely would be viewed differently. I.think the 93P is easier to use than most player's frame. I don't understand why the racket gets a bad rep because certain players can't hit deep.balls with it. Isn't it more to do with the player than the frame itself?
 
Last edited:

haqq777

Legend
Funny how much hate the 93P gets because no pros use it. I could.be wrong, but if it was called Babolat, Head or Wilson Phantom 93P, it definitely would be viewed differently. I.think the 93P is easier to use than most player's frame. I don't understand why the racket gets a bad rep because certain players can't hit deep.balls with it. Isn't it more to do with the player than the frame itself?
Well said. I've always said it's the player, if you look at the beginning pages of this thread where I gave my views. I was one of the early buyers and had gotten my friends curious about this 'new mid' that had just come out. And I'm glad PP made this thread. I know at least a couple of posters who got the 93P after I gave them the link for this thread and they are pretty happy with their racquets.

Now, for me, the reason I switched was the easy power and forgiveness later on in the match. When playing college kids who are moving non stop like energizer bunnies, I need that. I'm mid thirties and not as fast and 'spunky' as I used to be. Lighter static weight with similar swingweight is what gels better for me. I'm pretty sure high level players with aggressive style of play can use this stick very effectively too. So yeah, absolutely not the racquet's fault, it is a brilliant stick. And it plays bigger, like a 95, so nevermind the bad rep it gets for being a 'mid', among the TTW crowd anyway.

Also, I too think comparison with pros is ridiculous, they will use whatever their sponsors give them and they get paid. Just my $0.02.
 

Power Player

Talk Tennis Guru
Well said. I've always said it's the player, if you look at the beginning pages of this thread where I gave my views. I was one of the early buyers and had gotten my friends curious about this 'new mid' that had just come out. And I'm glad PP made this thread. I know at least a couple of posters who got the 93P after I gave them the link for this thread and they are pretty happy with their racquets.

Now, for me, the reason I switched was the easy power and forgiveness later on in the match. When playing college kids who are moving non stop like energizer bunnies, I need that. I'm mid thirties and not as fast and 'spunky' as I used to be. Lighter static weight with similar swingweight is what gels better for me. I'm pretty sure high level players with aggressive style of play can use this stick very effectively too. So yeah, absolutely not the racquet's fault, it is a brilliant stick. And it plays like a 95 so it gets a bad rep for being a 'mid' among the TTW crowd anyway.

Also, I too think comparison with pros is ridiculous, they will use whatever their sponsors give them and they get paid. Just my $0.02.
Thanks, and for me it is the weight. I need to play with a lighter frame because my stupid shoulder is a pain to keep healthy. I work to consistently generate high tip speed (this is the coaching I get) and I find that it's easier to do it with the lighter weight frames. Not sure the max I can work with but I went from being able to use the old TourG 330 to selling the new one because it was a bit too much.

That said I still use the Phantom 93 now and then because its such a great racquet and there is something about hitting with a mid that really focuses my strokes. I doubt anyone will see mine in the F/S section.
 

hescobal

Rookie
I now have 4 of the 14x18 93P! I got a little curious about extending them so I got some extended butt caps. So far, so good! Has anyone else extended there's?
 

Classic-TXP-IG MID

Hall of Fame
Funny how much hate the 93P gets because no pros use it. I could.be wrong, but if it was called Babolat, Head or Wilson Phantom 93P, it definitely would be viewed differently. I.think the 93P is easier to use than most player's frame. I don't understand why the racket gets a bad rep because certain players can't hit deep.balls with it. Isn't it more to do with the player than the frame itself?
Absolutely... the player, technique, and finally fitness.

Look, I have no doubt that certain racquets feel better to some people than others, and that certain strokes are more easily executed with one racquet than another (like a OHBH, for example), but that is personal preference. What I find hard to believe is that a good player would have trouble playing with any racquet, or not be able to modify it to make it suit them. That's all I'm saying.

They would take the racquet as is, play with it, and then say what they want changed in order to make it suit their playing style more. Which is essentially what Pros do when they get their racquet and customise it.

I would be absolutely shocked and amazed if I walked onto a practice court with Djokovic (and any Pro for that matter) and presented him with my tennis bag in which I had 15 different racquets (both Brand, style - Tweener, Mid, MP, thin beam, thick beam, etc), that it would take him more than a few minutes before he started dialing in his shots and they were all landing deep in the court and he was controlling and dominating every point with any one of those racquets. He might have preferences, but he would be able to play his style of game and win with any of them. It wouldn't matter if I was using a powerful racquet like a Pure Drive and he was using the 93P (or even a wooden racquet), the result would be the same.
 
Last edited:

mhkeuns

Hall of Fame
Absolutely... the player, technique, and finally fitness.

Look, I have no doubt that certain racquets feel better to some people than others, and that certain strokes are more easily executed with one racquet than another (like a OHBH, for example), but that is personal preference. What I find hard to believe is that a good player would have trouble playing with any racquet, or not be able to modify it to make it suit them. That's all I'm saying.

They would take the racquet as is, play with it, and then say what they want changed in order to make it suit their playing style more. Which is essentially what Pros do when they get their racquet and customise it.

I would be absolutely shocked and amazed if I walked onto a practice court with Djokovic (and any Pro for that matter) and presented him with my tennis bag in which I had 15 different racquets (both Brand, style - Tweener, Mid, MP, thin beam, thick beam, etc), that it would take him more than a few minutes before he started dialing in his shots and they were all landing deep in the court and he was controlling and dominating every point with any one of those racquets. He might have preferences, but he would be able to play his style of game and win with any of them. It wouldn't matter if I was using a powerful racquet like a Pure Drive and he was using the 93P (or even a wooden racquet), the result would be the same.
Agree 100%. I had frames where I didn’t like the impact feel or balance, but I don’t think I’ve ever bashed on a frame because I couldn’t play well with it. The Pure Drive VS comes to mind as one of those frames where I’ve seen many advanced players play excellent all-court tennis, but I couldn’t really gel with it. I was just not good enough to get the most out of the frame, though I did see what it could pull off when I was making the desperate counter punching shots that just exploded off the frame.

Don’t hate on the frame. It’s the player.
 

mhkeuns

Hall of Fame
Well said. I've always said it's the player, if you look at the beginning pages of this thread where I gave my views. I was one of the early buyers and had gotten my friends curious about this 'new mid' that had just come out. And I'm glad PP made this thread. I know at least a couple of posters who got the 93P after I gave them the link for this thread and they are pretty happy with their racquets.

Now, for me, the reason I switched was the easy power and forgiveness later on in the match. When playing college kids who are moving non stop like energizer bunnies, I need that. I'm mid thirties and not as fast and 'spunky' as I used to be. Lighter static weight with similar swingweight is what gels better for me. I'm pretty sure high level players with aggressive style of play can use this stick very effectively too. So yeah, absolutely not the racquet's fault, it is a brilliant stick. And it plays bigger, like a 95, so nevermind the bad rep it gets for being a 'mid', among the TTW crowd anyway.

Also, I too think comparison with pros is ridiculous, they will use whatever their sponsors give them and they get paid. Just my $0.02.
For sure. I’m nearing fifty, and I’ve been battling cramping issues when I play against advanced players. I love the heavier frames, especially the maneuverable frames like the 93P, but my best tennis against real good players (*younger) lasts about two sets of singles. I still don’t think about switching to something drastic like Head Ti because I love the feel on impact of the flexible player’s frames.

I think it matters more to me (*now that I’m not at my physical peak) now to have fun with tennis, regardless of the results. Of course, nothing is as fun as winning, but it’s also fun (*even in losing) knowing that some of the shots made were highlight reel worthy.
 
As I never customize my racquet, it was obvious the RF 97 was more stable and better at net (it's really outstanding). Not as easy to use though in the back of the court
On returns of serve, both were good but 93P was exceptional
Found I had to do more with the RF97A at net to get control needed.

93p is absolutely solid and stable with no conscious effort required.

The only advantages of the 97A were when very late to volleys and maybe hitting some very exaggerated spin at arm’s length.

93p has no trouble at all dealing with shots fired right at you as hard as your opponent can manage.

Sometimes the RF97A feels and sounds like a Wilson Profile. RF97A is great for hitting big ground strokes but I can hit much harder with the 93p with absolute confidence. It takes a little time to get used to hitting off the front foot with a full swing but then you can go toe to toe with anyone.

Always felt with the 97A that I might hit a flyer at any moment.

Most of the tennis I am playing is club tennis where most of the teams are made up of coaches, and some national league singles and doubles so you face a fairly heavy ball and big serves


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Boubi

Rookie
Old data that still proves you are wrong anyway.

Ill quote you - "few players can distinguish two tensions even separated by 10 lbs" - but yet you just posted data that shows almost half of rec players could. That's not what "few" means.
Data, only data, not just impressions. And still a majority of satellite players you surely never played against
 

Dartagnan64

Legend
Exactly what I am saying by the way....this 93p perfectly suits 3-4.5 levels
Then Prince made a winner since those are the folks buying racquets. ;)

But seriously, just because i don't face 5.0+ in my rec setting doesn't mean they can't play with the 93P. If I as a lowly 3.5 player can return a 4.5 serve with the 93P, then i'm sure a 5.0 can return a 5.0 serve with a 93P. And tbh honest that's the only place where forgiveness tends to matter for me.
 

Power Player

Talk Tennis Guru
Data, only data, not just impressions. And still a majority of satellite players you surely never played against
How do you know who I played against? I absolutely have played against Satellite players. They are all over the place where I’m at and are awesome to go against. Who are you exactly? You sure run your mouth a lot and make a lot of assumptions.

I love how each time one of your points is countered you can’t say anything and have now been whittled down to firing off personal attacks. Total troll account.

You’ve said a lot of ridiculous things on this forum and probably don’t have much experience so whatever. It’s just hilarious how you need to make all these rules for yourself to compensate for something.
 
Last edited:

Boubi

Rookie
How do you know who I played against? I absolutely have played against Satellite players. They are all over the place where I’m at and are awesome to go against. Who are you exactly? You sure run your mouth a lot and make a lot of assumptions.

I love how each time one of your points is countered you can’t say anything and have now been whittled down to firing off personal attacks. Total troll account.

You’ve said a lot of ridiculous things on this forum and probably don’t have much experience so whatever. It’s just hilarious how you need to make all these rules for yourself to compensate for something.
Go practice your footwork first
If you want a lesson, it's 50 bucks an hour
 
Did you try the 93P 18x20 on clay ? As it should not be his best ground, some of you tried to play 18x20 on hard court and 14x18 on clay ? Or is it just a stupid statement to play like this ? Also if it plays very differently, not sure if it's easy to switch from one to another. Just thinking is the 14x18 was a good option to play on clay for 93p 18x20 users, or if they just should stick on it and do their best here.
 
Last edited:

GripItNRipIt

New User
I found no issue with the 18x20 on clay. If it's a question of spin and dropping the ball inside the lines, I personally find I can generate plenty of spin with the 18x20. Having played both patterns in my last demo, I chose the 18x20 because it's so versatile: either a lot of topspin, driving flat shots, or wicked slice that really stays low on clay. I would not want to switch between them based on the court surface myself.
 

Tao69

Rookie
I found no issue with the 18x20 on clay. If it's a question of spin and dropping the ball inside the lines, I personally find I can generate plenty of spin with the 18x20. Having played both patterns in my last demo, I chose the 18x20 because it's so versatile: either a lot of topspin, driving flat shots, or wicked slice that really stays low on clay. I would not want to switch between them based on the court surface myself.
I have both and I don't think its a simple case of switching racquets and just playing on. They are very different racquets, there's an adjustment period and your style of play is not the same, let alone introducing a different surface into the equation. There's easy spin with the 14x18, but you lose the point and shoot you get with the 18x20. I think if you're an aggressive all court player that hits a flatter ball the 18x20 is the weapon of choice, but if you like to sit back on the baseline trading deep shots the 14x18 would be the go.
 

taylor15

Rookie
Went back the the 93p today after snapping a string on my TT100p. Played a set with my cousin and won today. I haven’t taken a set off him in about 4 years so I was pumped. I can’t say the racquet made a difference - but i didn’t lack confidence with it. Serves and returns are my strongest suit with this one
 

Tommy Haas

Hall of Fame
For 93P string breakers. Where do you usually break at? For me, it's always on a cross in the upper portion of the sweet spot and I don't know what that means. No matter what racquet I use, it's always a cross. Do most break mains or crosses?
 

taylor15

Rookie
For 93P string breakers. Where do you usually break at? For me, it's always on a cross in the upper portion of the sweet spot and I don't know what that means. No matter what racquet I use, it's always a cross. Do most break mains or crosses?
Mains for me, usually one just outside the middle two and also right above the sweet spot.
 

wevin

New User
I love this frame but am wondering if the weight / weight distribution is causing my wrist issues. If I go to other frames which are lighter like the PP100P or heavy but not as head light (VCP330) I don’t have the pain. Seems to really flare on forehands. Could this be a thing? What if I replaced leather grip with light weight grip plus OG? Could that help matters?
 

Dartagnan64

Legend
I love this frame but am wondering if the weight / weight distribution is causing my wrist issues. If I go to other frames which are lighter like the PP100P or heavy but not as head light (VCP330) I don’t have the pain. Seems to really flare on forehands. Could this be a thing? What if I replaced leather grip with light weight grip plus OG? Could that help matters?
I think that's worth a try. It's always hard to figure out wrist issues. But a different grip is an easy swap.
 

flanker2000fr

Professional
For 93P string breakers. Where do you usually break at? For me, it's always on a cross in the upper portion of the sweet spot and I don't know what that means. No matter what racquet I use, it's always a cross. Do most break mains or crosses?
I always break a center main, an inch / inch and a half towards the upper hoop. This is both with the 18x20 (strung Hyper G 17) or 14x18 (strung Hyper G 16).
 

Nextman916

Professional
Hey guys thought you would be interested in the phantom line updates, they added twaron textreme to the throat and 10/2 for added rigidity. Both 93P's still come with prince leather and the 97P/100P now come with resiTEX. They have a very minimal dark matte purple PJ that is slightly iridescent. For anybody that questioned the skill level the 93P demanded, the 97P could be your answer, it plays beautifully!

100P 16 x 18 310g 31.5cm Power level 800
97P 16 x 18 320g 31.0cm Power level 700
93P 18 x 20 330g 30.5cm Power level 600
93P 14 x 18 325g 31.0cm Power level 600

All 27 inch length and as far as I can tell all the beam widths are the same as previous. Stiffness isn't listed and I don't have an RDC, but I'll get the 97P tested soon to see.

- Deleted photo: not sure about tt's policy on leaking such things, listed specs instead just in case. Leaving interpretation open to "speculation" or "rumors".
 
Last edited:

Tommy Haas

Hall of Fame
Please tell us more about the 97P. I'm glad that I held off on the PP100 18x20 as the head was still a bit large for me. 97P would be perfect, 16x18 on that head size is fine with me. I could use thicker string if it's too open for me. Would help with string durability too. The weight seems perfect to slap on a leather grip bringing it up to 12oz fully configured. The biggest question is if it'll be sub 60RA or a stiffy. If it's 60RA or higher, then I'm less excited. A 97P with mid 50s RA would be pro stock specs comparable to Wilson and Head's popular pro stock molds.
 

Nextman916

Professional
The 97P is the more rounded phantom head shape so its actually shorter but rounder than my TT95. Regarding the 16x18 density, its actually a bit denser than the 16x19 on my TT95 with 16g in both. It's really whippy already, a leather grip would make it super headlight if that's your thing. Stability wise its not as stable as my TT95 but understandable due to its super thin beam. That was the beautiful thing about older Wilson's though with their PWS and flatter box beams, they offered great stability even when the beam width was so thin. RA is such a subjective thing depending on where the beam flexes, my 2015 TT95 (main racquet) always felt stiffer than its 60 RA rating. It feels noticeably stiffer than the current 93P out listed at 61 because the whole thing is like a solid piece that flexes, feels more like 64RA in my opinion. I think the 97P does feel stiffened up from the current 93P I demoed a while back but not in anyway harsher on the arm. If anything it's just toned down the flex in the top of the head. I felt the 93P 18x20 was way too noodlelike and the top of the head bent like crazy on impact, the new twaron added adjusts that.
 
Last edited:
Top