TM- is this racket "better" than the London Tour?
TM- is this racket "better" than the London Tour?
TM
Do you think the Melbourne is easier on the joints than the X10 325.
I realize they are completely different rackets but my elbow needs as much cushion as possible.
Thanks in advance.
They're very similar. The head size makes the difference. I think that most 93in2 users will find the Tour to be a little light, which basically allows one to customize. I assume that they would rather have people complain that a 93in2 is light, than too heavy. I added athletic tape only to the capped grommet with a leather grip, and replaced the dampener with two grams of lead on the bridge. That pumped the overall weight to only 346 grams. IMO, it now plays as close to the Classic Prestige as you can get. It is a true precision frame.
The Melbourne, IMO, is just outstanding for a 98in2. Nothing half-volleys or volleys better for a true player's stick. It is also crazy easy on the joints. All three of my coaches are using it, and they came from the London/PB 10 Mid/Legend.
Thanks TM; if it were not for the PS 85 re-issue, and the KPS 88, I would certainly be tempted to try these rackets; they are also very nice frames to look at!
TM
Do you think the Melbourne is easier on the joints than the X10 325.
I realize they are completely different rackets but my elbow needs as much cushion as possible.
Thanks in advance.
Hmmnn, I was playing college tennis then and I don't remember seeing many Kneissls (but I wasn't on the east coast). Rossignol was the Babolat in my area, Prince was everywhere, Wilson (no stings), Head, Dunlop,