Discussion in 'Racquets' started by TW Staff, Sep 14, 2012.
Full written review and video now available:
good review thanks! I have a question about the players, Mark Boone is a 5.0 player or just a typo?
Nice job on the review guys! I hit with this frame for a while and most of the likes and dislikes were exactly in sync with my opinions. It was interesting reading Chris's comments comparing the Q to the Prestige MP, since that is the frame I returned to even though it's the older MG version.
Nice. Agreed with everything Andy said, especially the slight sluggishness.
Still a lot of PK enthusiasts around here (I think), so PK reviews are always good to see and appreciated.
Am I the only one who thinks that the overall score seems weird? I wonder how they ended up with an overall score of 76 when 7 out of the 8 scores were equal or higher than that.
It seems the overall score of 76 is the mean of 'overall' scores submitted by the four play testers: 7.8, 8.7, 6.8, and 7.2. I suspect that the apparent discrepancy between the overall score of 76 and generally higher scores in other categories might be due to either: 1. The categories do not fully cover everything that the play testers are looking for; 2. Not all categories are weighted equally; 3. The whole package is different from the sum of smaller parts; and simply 4. Errors in human judgment. Just my thoughts. I would personally put more weight on the review's qualitative aspects rather than its quantitative scores.
Great review though, thanks TW!
I disagree on the sluggishness statements .... the ability to develop racquet head speed, the maneuverability at net, power and control are what enabled me to move back to a heavier more stable racquet. I love my Qtours.
The only downside I see to the frame are the cheap grommets PK used.
Thanks TW for posting a review of a racquet many of us were looking at, and doing it with the fairness and candidness we all want.
For those of you puzzled with the overall score, I have a few points to make:
1) These reviews come from a very small sample. You have to expect unexpected results every now and then.
2) If you want truly useful reviews, you want candid scores, not scores that are used to sell a product. The last thing I want is reviews where every racquet gets an "excellent" score. That is of no use to me.
3) The best way to interpret these reviews is to listen carefully to all the feedback, not just look at scores. I found TW's feedback to be useful and candid.
BTW...my racquet has an overall score of 75. The racquet it replaced had an overall score of 82. My game definitely improved when I switched. I have no problem taking these scores with a grain of salt.
A question to Andy: What brand is your t-shirt and where can we buy it! Very cool!
They're 'Stick It Wear' T-Shirts. Have a Google. I think TW carry some of their range.
I am fine with with the review, which I thought is a very truthful one. Compared to some other player rackets, Qtour does feel a bit more sluggish than them. I am also fine with the racket having a low score, which definitely does not determine if I use that particular racket or not. What I am puzzled about is how they arrive to that overall score given the individual components' scores are pretty much higher than that. Sorry, it could be me, being a physics teacher, is always keen to get to the bottom of anything that is puzzling to me.
Yes, they do.
perfectly legitimate concern.
You can't have a lower "overall score" when nearly all of the component scores are higher (some much higher) than the overall score. Math doesn't add up.
^^ of course you can! A racquet could achieve the highest numerical score ever for "power" but that might diminish rather than enhance its overall playability. That wasn't specifically the case here, but this racquet did have extremely varying scores, with an extremely high score for control but a very low score for maneuverability, so it would be difficult with that much "scatter" to come up with an overall score solely on a numerical basis.
In the summary, it says it's "pillowy" but multiple reviewers said it vibrated on off-center hits quite a bit??
I guess the ones that didn't say it vibrated hit mostly in the sweetspot. I do agree w/ the vibrations..much more so than the PK5G and Redondo MP.
Very nicely done video..nice fades, etc. though lighting of the guys could be better. You guys have your own tennis court at TW? I'm jealous
I have to agree with the reviewers. I order one of these on a whim and have found it very sluggish. It is also too muted for my taste.
Going to give it a little while longer before I move on.
Separate names with a comma.