There´s quite a few:The other aspect to look at it is the Pros endorsing the Pro Staff, and whether it would make sense for Wilson to keep the Pro Staff line or have the players switch their endorsements. Having said that I literally have no idea who endorses Pro Staffs.
The PS will live on. There are still a lot of club players at the 4.0 and 4.5 level that play with it.Now that the RF models are out, does anyone know if the pro staff line has gone the way of the dinosaur? In other words, will there be a Wilson pro staff v15?
If anyone knows please share…the v14 s are on sale now, wondering if this is the end of the line.
I know that they have been shopping the Prostaff X as a prostock WTA player frame along with the Steam 99 and Steam 100. Not sure if anyone is using it though.I doubt it would end with the 14. That said, it wouldn’t shock me if they reduced the lineap by removing the X, and UL. It’s a small sample size, but I still see a lot of pro staffs around, particularly with older players. But, I don’t see a lot of young players with the frame, most tend toward the Blade and I think it fits the modern game.
My guess, pro staff will be safe for another two generations at least
That was my question. It always seemed to be the more popular 6.1 95 string pattern, why go toward the 18x20 on the re-release of the frame?Meanwhile I'm wondering why Wilson doesn't make the new Six.One 95 in 16x18.
I'm guessing they went with 18x20 because that is the only one used on the Tour.That was my question. It always seemed to be the more popular 6.1 95 string pattern, why go toward the 18x20 on the re-release of the frame?
Meanwhile I'm wondering why Wilson doesn't make the new Six.One 95 in 16x18.
well, Opelka uses 16x18 and so did Kohlschrieber. While it's not common, it's still usedI'm guessing they went with 18x20 because that is the only one used on the Tour.
I love my 16x18 though.
It is a classic racquet because it works well with any grip for any attempted shot.Hope they don’t change too much. The V14 is not a classic racquet at all. Powerful en works fine with my western grip. Also a generous sweetspot.
I play almost exclusively on clay.
Yes, I'm not sure why people keep saying Pro Staff 97 is not suited to 'modern game' or is a 'control racquet'. It's basically a Pure Aero VS. Open 16x19 pattern, big sweet-spot, medium-stiff flex. It's incredibly easy to play with and I don't understand why more young players don't use it.Hope they don’t change too much. The V14 is not a classic racquet at all. Powerful en works fine with my western grip. Also a generous sweetspot.
I play almost exclusively on clay.
No swag sadly. Needs a slam winner to rep it to get the college kids to all swing on. The aero 98 and Wilson blade are on a tear because they see people on the tour endorsing/playing themYes, I'm not sure why people keep saying Pro Staff 97 is not suited to 'modern game' or is a 'control racquet'. It's basically a Pure Aero VS. Open 16x19 pattern, big sweet-spot, medium-stiff flex. It's incredibly easy to play with and I don't understand why more young players don't use it.
The principal issue is that its only easy to play with if you are good at tennis. A lot of young players are good at tennis but afflicted due to societal pressures or abusive coaching by a lack of self-belief and therefore bad at tennis.Yes, I'm not sure why people keep saying Pro Staff 97 is not suited to 'modern game' or is a 'control racquet'. It's basically a Pure Aero VS. Open 16x19 pattern, big sweet-spot, medium-stiff flex. It's incredibly easy to play with and I don't understand why more young players don't use it.
Great, maybe there is hope for a re-release.well, Opelka uses 16x18 and so did Kohlschrieber. While it's not common, it's still used
I love the PS X and am genuinely concerned for its future given the seemingly lack of popularity since its release and competition from the RF line. Truly hope some WTA players and juniors sustain it. At the very least I could rely on the pro stock market for the frame…I know that they have been shopping the Prostaff X as a prostock WTA player frame along with the Steam 99 and Steam 100. Not sure if anyone is using it though.
True, the 97 V14 also a great racket for me. Love it - it teaches me how to play better. Although the RF 01 Pro is out, I will sit that one out. For now I have too much fun the the 97 V14.The 97 V14 is an awesome racquet. I would be intrigued and interested in a V15.
If you like the PS, I don´ really think you would like the new RF Pro...it is a very demanding racquet, kind of unique within today´s portfolio of all frames but very specific. Had a chance to test it but for me it´s a no go for sure. It might suite to a certain type of attacking advanced players who have great technique and their playstyle is mainly attack + finishing points at net. It´s not a baseliner´s dream at all this racquet doesn´t like neutral shots and hates to defend. No help whatsoever, very low launch angle, simply not for an average 4.0 JoeTrue, the 97 V14 also a great racket for me. Love it - it teaches me how to play better. Although the RF 01 Pro is out, I will sit that one out. For now I have too much fun the the 97 V14.
I wasn't expecting much and I was actually shocked at how bad it feels.The RF01 Pro sucks
That's what I thought after hitting for 5 mins with it - but thought I was just a hater (Wilson PS lifer who switched to Bab PSVS 2022 a year ago)... But to hear someone of your experience agree... I never gelled with the PS97 but think its an amazing frame compared to the RFpro and worth continuing. Such a missed opportunity IMHO, if only they could have kept more "prostaffness" I might have switched back to Wilson. Yea I know they were looking to make something more modern but not a fan. Some may love it and they'll sell a lot due to RF markings but I don't see longtime PS users adopting itThe RF01 Pro sucks
I hated the feel and it felt like an early 90’s widebody player’s racket and I hated widebody rackets back in the day.That's what I thought after hitting for 5 mins with it - but thought I was just a hater (Wilson PS lifer who switched to Bab PSVS 2022 a year ago)... But to hear someone of your experience agree... I never gelled with the PS97 but think its an amazing frame compared to the RFpro and worth continuing. Such a missed opportunity IMHO, if only they could have kept more "prostaffness" I might have switched back to Wilson. Yea I know they were looking to make something more modern but not a fan. Some may love it and they'll sell a lot due to RF markings but I don't see longtime PS users adopting it
Like some have said, maybe like the Prestige the ProStaff will live on even without a *top* endorser/user
This racquet was not probaby very popular heh...Pro Open: It's back!
It was so good. Pure playability in frame form. No matter where you are in the court or what situation you've gotten yourself into, the Pro Open is game. Considering the lines Wilson continue with, it's a crying shame the Pro Open division was shuttered.This racquet was not probaby very popular heh...
The PS X is perhaps the best Wilson racquet in a decade. It's here to stay. It's the reason why PS line will stay. Several teenagers in our club are moving to PS X.I doubt it would end with the 14. That said, it wouldn’t shock me if they reduced the lineap by removing the X, and UL. It’s a small sample size, but I still see a lot of pro staffs around, particularly with older players. But, I don’t see a lot of young players with the frame, most tend toward the Blade and I think it fits the modern game.
My guess, pro staff will be safe for another two generations at least
Just this "PS is hard to play cliché" probably spread with the hidden help of other producers/competitors, is hard to beat.Yes, I'm not sure why people keep saying Pro Staff 97 is not suited to 'modern game' or is a 'control racquet'. It's basically a Pure Aero VS. Open 16x19 pattern, big sweet-spot, medium-stiff flex. It's incredibly easy to play with and I don't understand why more young players don't use it.
Just this "PS is hard to play cliché" probably spread with the hidden help of other producers/competitors, is hard to beat.
I’m glad people are enjoying it. Like you, I’m going off what I see/hear and I just haven’t seen anyone using it beyond a demo, which I’ve heard poor feedback from. Either way, I like the idea of it and hope it or something like it can keep the line goingThe PS X is perhaps the best Wilson racquet in a decade. It's here to stay. It's the reason why PS line will stay. Several teenagers in our club are moving to PS X.
I also love it. It's modern enough (100si), but heavy enough to still be solid. I think the 97 serves better, harder, more accurately, but the X off the ground is beautiful.I’m glad people are enjoying it. Like you, I’m going off what I see/hear and I just haven’t seen anyone using it beyond a demo, which I’ve heard poor feedback from. Either way, I like the idea of it and hope it or something like it can keep the line going
Is it really though?Yes, I'm not sure why people keep saying Pro Staff 97 is not suited to 'modern game' or is a 'control racquet'. It's basically a Pure Aero VS. Open 16x19 pattern, big sweet-spot, medium-stiff flex. It's incredibly easy to play with and I don't understand why more young players don't use it.
Yes. Try it and step out of the clichés.Is it really though?
Yes. There is nothing about its specs which make it difficult to use.Is it really though?
I played with the PS 97 for 2 years and moved on because it was lacking that extra oomph.Yes. Try it and step out of the clichés.
I think this is bc most people bite off more than they should by using full poly for example. Or at least don't use a thinner gauge.I played with the PS 97 for 2 years and moved on because it was lacking that extra oomph.
It’s nothing like the PAs of the world. The additional mass at 3/9 (can’t remember what tech they call it) is nice but a lingering tech from a bygone era.
Dan EvansThere´s quite a few:
- Dimitrov leading the pack as the old wolf
- Lehecka (with 6.1.95 underneath)
- Bautista Agut
- Qinwen Zheng
- Ons Jabeur
But yeah...you got a point. There are no more younger players endorsing or using the Pro Staffs anymore so who knows about the future of this line. For sure no update for 2025 is planned.
AgreeThe RF01 Pro sucks
Don’t disagree that strings play a big part.I think this is bc most people bite off more than they should by using full poly for example. Or at least don't use a thinner gauge.
PS97 - really opens up with Gut or Multi mains and poly crosses.
PSX - definitely takes full poly better (I like 1.20mm)
This is my opinion / experience.
I thought twistweight is higher than it used to be on average, making it a "modern" feature. AlsoDon’t disagree that strings play a big part.
I do think we are glancing over the topic here though which is the racquets inherent DNA needing a relook to adapt to how tennis is being played now if Wilson wants to see an uptick in Prostaff usage.
Box beam, highish twistweight, oval head, constant thinish beam, none of these are “modern” per se.
No point having pin point control when you cant hit big enough consistently to keep the other person from dictating.
I was a huge advocate of box beams, then one of the coaches pointed out I should probably consider racquets that keep me in the points longer given my level of play (and age…) with less focus on feel. He wasn’t wrong, the improvement is measurable, not massive, but enough to convince me to accept I need more help than a box beam offers.Don’t disagree that strings play a big part.
I do think we are glancing over the topic here though which is the racquets inherent DNA needing a relook to adapt to how tennis is being played now if Wilson wants to see an uptick in Prostaff usage.
Box beam, highish twistweight, oval head, constant thinish beam, none of these are “modern” per se.
No point having pin point control when you cant hit big enough consistently to keep the other person from dictating.
What is thought of as “stability” is now made up for by increased stiffness in the hoop, whereas it used to be addressed with increased mass/weight. More weight at 3/9 means a more sluggish racquet as far as modern strokes are concerned.I thought twistweight is higher than it used to be on average, making it a "modern" feature. Also
the oval head shape is on a lot of classic racquets, but it is hardly an anachronism. For example, the Head Speed racquets.
I agree stiffness and beam thickness have increased for increased stability, but I think average twistweights today are as high as, if not higher than, ever.What is thought of as “stability” is now made up for by increased stiffness in the hoop, whereas it used to be addressed with increased mass/weight. More weight at 3/9 means a more sluggish racquet as far as modern strokes are concerned.