Thanks for the corrections! I did not know about the Davis and completely forgot about the Rossignols!
Just to get back on topic, I think most everyone reading this section of the board would more or less agree on the top 5 GOATs (as previous posts show); it's when we go beyond the top 5 or10 that the discussion can become more interesting.
I have now tried out 168 different racquets of various vintage on the court, for at least 15 minutes each, and have rated them based on my instant impressions (power, control, stability, comfort). Since I couldn't control for string differences, frame condition, grip size and weight disparities, and there was usually only a single example of each racquet for me to try, the results I collected are arguably little better than straight-up gut feelings.
Nevertheless, the best performers for me under these circumstances turned out to be:
1) 2-way tie: Sentra Boron Stealth, Dunlop Max 300i
2) 2-way tie: Match Mate Graphite, Wilson Hyper Hammer 5.3
3) 4-way tie: Wilson Odyssey Comp, Wilson Sting Midsize, T.A.Davis Esprit, Spalding Powertech 100
4) 3-way tie: Bard Mid-King (later version), Spalding Smasher (graphite version), Estusa P3 Laser
5) 2-way tie: Wilson TX-6000, Slazenger Phantom Gold (early version)
None of these sticks has ever made the shortlist for GOATs, probably because I am a mediocre player at best. and these frames just happened to be optimally set up for my present ability and physical condition. I can't even explain why some radically different racquets could end up performing so comparably well for me. My original intent behind this silly exercise was to use the data to identify my own "Goldilocks zone" in terms of weight, head size, balance, flex, swing weight, etc., but when I ran some basic statistical tests on my ratings against the physical measurements, I found no significant correlation between my results and any of the variables.
There is definitely plenty of science behind every GOAT, but at the individual level, there are just too many different factors contributing to our personal impression of any given stick on any given day for us to place undue confidence in numbers and ratings, at least not until we can reliably and objectively translate the full spectrum of game-playing sensations into independent numbers. I tend to see the consensus GOATs as public GOATs, and those that performed well in my own experiment as private GOATS. The public and private GOATs can happily co-exist without stepping on one another's hooves, and they never need to justify or explain their own existence to the other, because they are just a bunch of GOATS.
