Venus', Serena's, and Roddick's racquets.

johncauthen said:
I'm not selling it yet. I can't send you one because it isn't patented, but I described it close to what I, hopefully, will have to sell. You can make it with some sheet lead. It will come in many weights, but in one perfect shape that I will have to patent first.
Click to expand...


John what will you do so solve the problem of the mains moving around besides using a ploy.

Also what mods do you think for POG mid and prestige classic? I am thinking the POG may benifit from a stetch but the prestige classic already has a narrow hoop.
 
jackson vile said:
Ok I got ya, so do you think taking the foam out of the handle and replacing the mass with the tapered weight will do it then, also you may need to stretch the hoop more or continue adding mass to upper hoop.
Click to expand...
For the PS 6.0 85, I don't think that stretching the hoop further would change the dynamics to a significant degree. I will still continue to stretch it though, for the same reasons why Mack says he does it. He says that he does it not for "fine-tuning" the dynamics like why John does it; he does it to liven up the stringbed.

About removing the foam, I think it should help by doing so. I don't like having "unnecessary" mass at areas where I don't want it to be at. Yes the foam probably is there for dampening but I don't need dampening; it's just extra "unnecessary" weight at undesirable locations along the frame. I'd rather have any extra weight go to better use, such as for increasing torsional stability, adjusting frame to desired balance point, increasing SW to desired preference, add more mass to the "key location points" of the "ideal concept" etc.

Good day now. 8)
 
jackson vile said:
John what will you do so solve the problem of the mains moving around besides using a ploy.

Also what mods do you think for POG mid and prestige classic? I am thinking the POG may benifit from a stetch but the prestige classic already has a narrow hoop.
Click to expand...
According to Mr Cauthen, the POG has pretty good dynamics as-is. That is because the stabilizer bar is a concentration of mass located close to the key point(s) of the "ideal concept". I'm sure John could tell you things to do to make that frame even better.

Good day now. 8)
 
John Cauthen,

I baked a cake the other day and I added some flour that was not in the mix. It came out better than the Betty Crocker mix. Then I noticed that Betty Crocker increased the flour in her mix. Heyk, that is my idea. They stole it from me.

Or try this . . .

Wilson made a racquet. I added some lead tape. Wilson then changes the raquet to be weighted like mine. Hey, that is my idea. They stole it from me.

See the stupidity in this?
 
Mace said:
John Cauthen,

I baked a cake the other day and I added some flour that was not in the mix. It came out better than the Betty Crocker mix. Then I noticed that Betty Crocker increased the flour in her mix. Heyk, that is my idea. They stole it from me.

Or try this . . .

Wilson made a racquet. I added some lead tape. Wilson then changes the raquet to be weighted like mine. Hey, that is my idea. They stole it from me.

See the stupidity in this?
Click to expand...
Those comments where absolutely uncalled-for. You probably do not even don't know the man. You probably were not there to witness his accounts and dealings with his product presentation that he claimed to have taken place.

Just because there is no, or not enough, real proof or evidence provided in order to make you a firm believer of his claims. Mr Cauthen doesn't seem like the type of peson who would argue with you anyways. Your disbelief is nothing to him. He has nothing to prove to you. That's probably not part of his agenda.

He's too humble to dish-out on you anyways! Unlike you, taking the time to post comments to bash another person, he has other piorities. "Oh, and look who's talking! You TennisAsAlways are taking the time to bash me!" Well that's because someone needs to speak up to the wrong-doer.

Why not talk to him if you are curious of his claim(s), like a civilized human being would do, rather than take a pathetic cheap shot at the man?
 
Bill Tilden said:
Do you have a job at wilson or at head Mace?



Try this Mace: concentration, concentration in tennis is all. If you have concentration you can run the 100 meters in 9.88 like Ben Jhonson. do you? you can do it! you can do it! concentration is all.

but Ben Jhonson do it only with concentration? or not? Mystery of life, like your mind.


Administrator please delete all.
Click to expand...
Good rhetorical point, Mr Tilden.

Good day now. 8)
 
480607.jpg

Agassi's racquet broke at 2,4, 8 and 10 o'clock. Extra weak there? And I think those locations are also where some HEAD racquets have the LiquidMetal.
Meaning?
 
johncauthen said:
The Storm is a wonderful racquet. I see Ginepri struggling with his Storm and know what's wrong with it. When strung right, it's one of the best racquets there is.

All you have to do is prestretch the head when you mount it in the machine, less 1/16 inch. If you have a six-point machine, crank the knob and watch as the racquet gets longer. That happens naturally when you mount most racquets in a six-point machine. Just look at it and notice how much it prestretches as you crank on the knob.

Prestretch it less than 1/16.

In a two-point machine, set the the mounts so the racquet stretches a little. Mount the top of the head first, then push the handle down into the bottom mount and notice how much it stretches when it seats. It should be less than 1/16 inch.

String the mains at 40. String top six crosses at 57 and the rest of the crosses at 60. It should feel like 57.

If it's stretched too long it will feel boardy and not pocket the ball, but the Storm probably won't be stretched too long.

It's a great racquet when stretched. Ginepri's racquet is compressed, and he can't beat anybody, lately. All he needs is an off-the-shelf Storm, strung right.

I think any string combined with Big Banger mains would hit well!
Click to expand...
 
Tim Hamilton said:
johncauthen said:
The Storm is a wonderful racquet. I see Ginepri struggling with his Storm and know what's wrong with it. When strung right, it's one of the best racquets there is.

All you have to do is prestretch the head when you mount it in the machine, less 1/16 inch. If you have a six-point machine, crank the knob and watch as the racquet gets longer. That happens naturally when you mount most racquets in a six-point machine. Just look at it and notice how much it prestretches as you crank on the knob.................................................................................................
Click to expand...

[Tim Hamilton replyed]: [blank blank blank blank blank blank blank blank
blank blank blank blank blank blank blank blank blank blank blank blank
blank blank blank blank blank blank blank blank blank blank blank blank
blank blank blank blank
Click to expand...
^ What's your point? I see you quoted Mr Cauthen's post. What do you have to say to that?
 
John,

Thanks for the feedback on the Pure Storm. I've been a "Prince Guy" forever and recently switched to Babolat due to the fact that I haven't found anything in the Prince lineup that I liked. I played with the old Graphite II MP for years and haven't found anything I liked better, or at least equally, until the Pure Storm. The 03's are interesting but I fell for the Pure Storm just before they came out with the 03 Tour Mid (95) this year. I don't have any Luxilon at the moment but I do have half a set of Poly Star Energy and some Technifibre X-1 Biphase that I will use for this maiden stringing voyage.

I have to admit that your methods sound unconventional, but after years of cobbling on my own rackets, trying to find that "perfect feel" or the "holy grail," I'm open minded enough to entertain your ideas. Worst thing that can happen is I don't like it and go back to the way I was stringing before. Best case scenario is that I love it and pass the word on to others. I just wanted to thank you for getting back to me with those recommendations so quickly. I appreciate it and I'll keep you posted on how it works out.
 
T,

In my opinion the o-ports definitely increased the sweetspot and gave the racket a more comfortable feel. I don't think I'm qualified to answer your question about the power level. I've only hit with the 03 Tours and none of the other 03's. I've heard good things about the 03 White. My opinion about the 03 Tours is that they didn't have a great deal of power. It was decent, but you really had to bring your own. The control of the Tours was very good. The power level was the one aspect that kept me from going with the 03 Tour. I felt as if I would have had to add some weight to it to get more pop. I have a slower swing speed and usually lean towards heavier rackets to give me a little help with power. That being said, I didn't have to add too much weight to the Pure Storm to reach a comfortable level of pop for my game.
 
Tim Hamilton said:
T,

In my opinion the o-ports definitely increased the sweetspot and gave the racket a more comfortable feel. I don't think I'm qualified to answer your question about the power level. I've only hit with the 03 Tours and none of the other 03's. I've heard good things about the 03 White. My opinion about the 03 Tours is that they didn't have a great deal of power. It was decent, but you really had to bring your own. The control of the Tours was very good. The power level was the one aspect that kept me from going with the 03 Tour. I felt as if I would have had to add some weight to it to get more pop. I have a slower swing speed and usually lean towards heavier rackets to give me a little help with power. That being said, I didn't have to add too much weight to the Pure Storm to reach a comfortable level of pop for my game.
Click to expand...

Wrong. Not my opinion, but on the Prince website the power is advertised as being extremely high in comparison to their other racquets.

Now my opinion. The power is extremely high and I also think you are wrong. The 03 technology has nothing to do with it because the string has an anchor point which is stationary, just like a grommet. Once you are outside the grommet, the string is free all the way to the other anchor point. With 03 the string has an anchor point and the string is free to the other anchor point. No advantage whatsoever. If you think I am wrong, just watch and mark my words. The 03 technology will disappear. I say it will vanish. Just wait.
 
hey johncauthen or mack, i used to play with an i radical and i've switched to an o3 tour midplus. how can i improve the performance in my o3 tour???hey man thx in advance
 
Mace said:
Wrong. Not my opinion, but on the Prince website the power is advertised as being extremely high in comparison to their other racquets.

Now my opinion. The power is extremely high and I also think you are wrong. The 03 technology has nothing to do with it because the string has an anchor point which is stationary, just like a grommet. Once you are outside the grommet, the string is free all the way to the other anchor point. With 03 the string has an anchor point and the string is free to the other anchor point. No advantage whatsoever. If you think I am wrong, just watch and mark my words. The 03 technology will disappear. I say it will vanish. Just wait.
Click to expand...
I believe O3 takes away some control but adds some spin, power and feel to the racquet. It's also easy on the elbow. I like it. I certainly hope it won't go away.
 
Technology aside and it's probably been said before, Venus Serena and Andy use racquets that are way too powerful and it actually limits them.

They're all strong physical specimens. If they use a less powerful racquet you can hit out on the ball and it will stay in the court. Doesn't seem fun to be that strong and have to temper your shots for control.
 
Mace said:
Wrong. Not my opinion, but on the Prince website the power is advertised as being extremely high in comparison to their other racquets.

Now my opinion. The power is extremely high and I also think you are wrong. The 03 technology has nothing to do with it because the string has an anchor point which is stationary, just like a grommet. Once you are outside the grommet, the string is free all the way to the other anchor point. With 03 the string has an anchor point and the string is free to the other anchor point. No advantage whatsoever. If you think I am wrong, just watch and mark my words. The 03 technology will disappear. I say it will vanish. Just wait.
Click to expand...
 
Mace,

I don't recall asking for your opinion and I don't really care about all of your technological jargon regarding anchor points. I work in a pro shop with over 75 different types of rackets from all of the major racket mfg's and some smaller named mfg's. I've hit with, or against just about all of these sticks and it doesn't matter what the website numbers say. I still feel you really need to bring a bit of your own power when playing with the 03 Tour. Also I never said that the 03 technology had anything to do with (what I felt ) was a lower power level. In terms of the longevity of the 03 technology, I actually agreed with you on that, for awhile................. last year when they came out with the first 03's I thought it might go the way of the Wilson Rollers, but they have already proven more successful than that. I seriously doubt that Prince would come out with more 03 rackets in the second year of that rackets existence, and have pro players using them if they didn't feel they were going to be around for awhile. Think back..............how many pros do you remember ever seeing with a Wilson Roller racket? Hunker down Mace, the future is coming!
 
Tim Hamilton said:
Mace,

I don't recall asking for your opinion and I don't really care about all of your technological jargon regarding anchor points. I work in a pro shop with over 75 different types of rackets from all of the major racket mfg's and some smaller named mfg's. I've hit with, or against just about all of these sticks and it doesn't matter what the website numbers say. I still feel you really need to bring a bit of your own power when playing with the 03 Tour. Also I never said that the 03 technology had anything to do with (what I felt ) was a lower power level. In terms of the longevity of the 03 technology, I actually agreed with you on that, for awhile................. last year when they came out with the first 03's I thought it might go the way of the Wilson Rollers, but they have already proven more successful than that. I seriously doubt that Prince would come out with more 03 rackets in the second year of that rackets existence, and have pro players using them if they didn't feel they were going to be around for awhile. Think back..............how many pros do you remember ever seeing with a Wilson Roller racket? Hunker down Mace, the future is coming!
Click to expand...

I am impressed that you work in an actual pro shop. What kind of degree did you get that qualified you to work in a real live pro shop. Maybe someday I can aspire to that lofty goal. In any case, you think you know enough to dispute Prince's own data. I agree with their data, even though I am very impressed by the fact that you work in a real live pro shop.

I think Wilson has a 03 holes type of technology right now that they use on some of their power racquets. I think it is called Power Holes. I remember Volkl had it too years ago with their large grommets. I think the technology has as much staying power as the market will allow. It has nothing to do with whether it works. I know it does not work. I am not sure that in and of itself it harms the racquet though. If it sells racquets they will continue to use it and if the racquets don't sell they will stop.
 
John are there any updates? I am still waiting for one of my racekts and the other one I don't think I am going to get and have to re-order
 
No, I am not too keen on that particular racket. I am looking at the 200gxl, the LMIXL, and LMPmid,


I want to take the cap gromet off the mid replace with radical grommet, then tak off any when on handle and then take out any weight in handle. I can take the weight that has been taken off and put some at 12 and the rest in the top middle handle, also I konw a tennis place that sells a 90sqin racket that has not weight/foam ect added so it is 10oz or lighter, it is a mold of the MW200g but a bit stiffer.

The prestige is all hallow and has no weight in the forks and cross bridges. But I don't think you can stretch the head as it is already very narrow?

Also I am thinking of getting the Ncode 6.1, if I can remove the foam in the handle or lead I will do so and move it. I hear that it is very stable anyways and swings and feels like what john is talking about.

Will John let use buy or demo those rackets of his? I will buy it and let some of us demo it.

You can email me also
 
Mr Cauthen, i have 3 wilson HTours and they are way too light for my game. i would be greatly thankful if you could tell me where to add weight to get the best out of this frame. thanks.
 
Oh sorry dudes. Ummm, dont really know how to fix it. If you visit the "Is Blake using a Oversize Prince??" Thread, there will be a link to the picture. Its Blake standing at the net. If someone could post the link that works, much appriciated
 
jamumafa said:
Oh sorry dudes. Ummm, dont really know how to fix it. If you visit the "Is Blake using a Oversize Prince??" Thread, there will be a link to the picture. Its Blake standing at the net. If someone could post the link that works, much appriciated
Click to expand...
You mean this picture?
 
John
When I was a high school player(many moons ago), I used to add layers of masking tape around my handle to increase the size of the grip and also to make it rounder. I probably added about 4 or 5 layers of tape. I remember that my racquet didn't feel any heavier but that it actually felt more head light. I really liked the feel and subsequently, I did it to all my racquets. I used a 4 5/8 grip but after adding all that tape, it probably ended up close to a 5. Did adding all that tape accomplish the same goal as you adding the lead sheet to the top of the handle? Can I use the lead tape that golfers use for their clubs to modify my racquet? If so, then how much should I use? My son uses the Prince O3 tour and I would like to experiment on his spare one to see if it would be of any benefit. Thanks.
 
^ I haven't heard from John in a while. I bet he is busy with his ideas and he's probably looking for work somewhere (I'm guessing). I emailed John several days ago, but haven't heard back from him yet. Hopefully he'll be back with MORE ideas and findings to share with us. Good luck John!
 
My computer crashed. That was okay, because I've been working on getting out perfect weights to the people who emailed me, and the computer would have been a distraction. It came back yesterday, and the weights should be going out on Saturday.

mtk, I can send you one of the handle weights if you email me with your address. The weight works on O3 Tours.

Watching Blake play, I don't think he has enough weight in his handle. He is having to release, not quite power through his shots, and lately it has been giving him trouble. Before, the racquet seemed perfect. The same racquet can feel good, but if it has a small fault, it will start to tire out muscles in your arm, and suddenly you don't know how to hit anything with it. Blake might be on the verge of that. I think his racquet needs a little more weight in the handle.
 
Good to see you around John!

^ John, I have ordered a Hammer 6.3 and am looking forward to YOUR personally hand-shaped weight. I was wondering why you felt that the Hammer 6.3 works very well with your concept; I mean, you add about 40-50 grams of weight up to the 9" point on the handle, right? The thing is, the Hammer 6.3 already has a HIGH swing weight.

• Why/how is it that you feel that the Hammer 6.3 is the best candidate to apply the concept?

I ended up orderiing the Hammer 6.3 anyways. The "HIGHER" swing weight should NOT be a problem to me (Remember, afterall, I did apply the "concept" to a PS 6.0 85, and added lead tape to the tip of the hoop, and so a "HIGH" swing weight is of no concern to me. I ended up wielding a PS 6.0 that was over 15 ounces after customiztion. Plays great though.). I remember you mentioning that some racquets would not end up having an ideal weight after modifications, and so I just wanted to know what makes the Hammer 6.3 suitable to you. Now I know tha the 6.3 is VERY light interms of STATIC mass, but the dynamic mass is VERY high, even higher that the PS 6.0; perhaps the 6.3 has "one of" the highest SWING WEIGHT of all the current frames on the market. So Mr Cauthen, please elaborate your opinion as to what makes a 6.3 (with an already high SW in stock form) with the added tapered chuck-of-mass playable to you.
 
Hey, John, I hate to bug you about those weights, but I might be interested myself in one. First, though, I'd have two questions: 1, is there a diminishing return based on weight? I mean, I don't have a problem swinging a heavy stick, cause I'm a strapping young lad and all, but is there an actual diminishing return?
2, Would it work on a Diablo Tour? I mean, it probably would work on ANYthing, but I figure better safe than sorry.
Oh, right, and 3, what exactly does the weight itself weigh? I'm sure you answered 3 before, so I'm sorry to ask again..
 
John, you should watch "American Inventor". It's on ABC, on right at this very moment. It's fun to watch different people present different ideas.

Good day now. 8)
 
johncauthen said:
My computer crashed. That was okay, because I've been working on getting out perfect weights to the people who emailed me, and the computer would have been a distraction. It came back yesterday, and the weights should be going out on Saturday.

mtk, I can send you one of the handle weights if you email me with your address. The weight works on O3 Tours.

Watching Blake play, I don't think he has enough weight in his handle. He is having to release, not quite power through his shots, and lately it has been giving him trouble. Before, the racquet seemed perfect. The same racquet can feel good, but if it has a small fault, it will start to tire out muscles in your arm, and suddenly you don't know how to hit anything with it. Blake might be on the verge of that. I think his racquet needs a little more weight in the handle.
Click to expand...


I emailed you and did not hear back, jacksonvile@hotmail.com. I want to talk with you about a few rackets.

The strings on my LMP+ and POG mid finally stretched out but now they feels like crap.

I have the dunlop 200g xl that I am modding, got the LMinstct XL in, 200g MW 90sqin (feels real head heavy and the balance is almost even), and will be getting the LM prestige mid in.
 
Similar to the Hammer 6.3.........

John, what do you think of the Wilson n6 nCode frame?

See below. The specs are very similar to that of the Hammer 6.3:

n6%20nCode%20midplus.bmp



n6 nCode Midplus specs:

Head Size: 95 sq. in. / 613 sq. cm.
Length: 27 inches / 69 cm
Strung Weight: 9.8oz / 278g
Balance: 7 pts Head Heavy
Swingweight: 326
Stiffness: 60
Beam Width: Dual Taper Beam 24.5 mm
Composition: 10% nCoded Hyper Carbon / 90% nCoded High Modulus Graphite
String Pattern: 16 Mains / 18 Crosses


Hyper Hammer 6.3 Midplus specs:

Head Size: 95 sq. in. / 613 sq. cm
Length: 27 inches / 69 cm
Strung Weight: 9.9oz / 281g
Balance: 8 pts Head Heavy
Swingweight: 342
Stiffness: 66
Beam Width: 26 mm/22 mm Dual Taper Beam
Composition: 10% Hyper Carbon / 60% Graphite / 30% Fiberglass
String Pattern: 16 Mains / 18 Crosses

The n6 costs a bit more. The bridge appears to be a bit "higher" than the 6.3's and so that may be a good thing.
 
jackson vile said:
I emailed you and did not hear back, jacksonvile@hotmail.com. I want to talk with you about a few rackets.

The strings on my LMP+ and POG mid finally stretched out but now they feels like crap.

I have the dunlop 200g xl that I am modding, got the LMinstct XL in, 200g MW 90sqin (feels real head heavy and the balance is almost even), and will be getting the LM prestige mid in.
Click to expand...
Which racquet are you talking about? A 200g with a 90 in² head? The smallest ones I've seen available are 85 in².
 
Hi John,
I cannot seem to get your email address so here is mine...puttputtgolf@msn.com Could you also include specs for a Prince Diablo XP, which I use. Thanks a bunch. BTW,my Diablo XP is the MP model
 
Very happy to heard about you John,

Now I have all my racquet at 16.2 oz. and all the racquet play well i can use this raquet for two hours without problems, I agree with you when you say: "something happens at 16 oz". The Pro kennex (kinetic 5g) in my experiments:

The prokennex weight 335 grams if I put 50 grams the raquet work very well, if i put 100 gramms the raquet work so and so but if I put on 125 grams the raqut return to work well - wonderfully. You have done a very good work john;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Serena's Racquet....
Replies
2
Views
897
danniflava
D
travlerajm
Roddick Signature Racquet Specs are not Roddick's Actual Specs!
Replies
11
Views
3K
BattleAxe
B
C
Customizing Wilson Pro Staff 97 Countveil
Replies
0
Views
429
crobison
C
Andy Zarzuela
Venus and Serena's Solid Black frames back in the late 90s?
Replies
12
Views
2K
Brettolius
Brettolius
Andy Zarzuela
Comparing Venus and Serena's games yet again...
Replies
5
Views
943
anointedone
anointedone
Back
Top