We are the two percent!

pabletion

pabletion

Hall of Fame
"While discussing with a [racquet] company about an updated line, I bemoaned it was a shame that it didn’t include a heavier “Tour” or “Pro” version. The rep responded: “For you and the six people who would buy it.”

Pretty accurate quote from an interesting read:
http://www.tennis.com/gear/2016/09/...nds-we-learned-about-seasons-final-slam/61147

Are we the TWO PERCENT of the tennis consumer population? I mean, the ones who dont go about the hype od new technologies and paintjobs, but are educated enough regarding racquet specs, or at least are AWARE there's such a thing as SPECS?

According to the article, racquet companies are going after the masses, and we're not them, the masses are the recreational players, who look at Nadal and Federer swinging their sticks and immediately go for them, because "they have to be the best out there".

Tweener racquets are in, few exceptions out there, most of them have to do with what Federer uses, but the majority of rec players are goinf to feel comfortable with a sub 11oz frame, "just like Nadal's".

The author doesnt mention the frame he wishes had a TOUR version, but I'm gonna guess its the new hyped Pure Strike '17, which in fact left out the Tour version on this ocasion.

I'm a Babolat fan and I've enjoyed their more "traditional" frames for about 10 years (Pure Control, Pure Storm, Pure Strike), but I'm specially impressed by their marketing strategies and their Research & Development team what the article talks about is spot on: get juniors playing with your frames, develop a "taste" for them and you'll have them for life.

Only the "purists", part of the TWO PERCENT will continue to enjoy and go for the Prestiges, 6.1's, 200g racquets.
 
Last edited:
I think almost everyone knows there are specs, including weight, balance etc, but very few are educated enough to understand how to match the racket with their physical abilities by parameters.
I've seen parents who make their usta competing kids play very stiff rackets (like pure drive) when their kids are suffering from shoulder soreness, etc.
 
Well, when I started playing (17 y.o.), I didnt KNOW there were specs. That went on for about a year or two, including my first two or three racquets (Cheap Pro Kennex, a Wilson pro staff 5.8 stretch of some sort... and finally a Wilson Pro Staff Classic 6.1 as my 1st real racquet).

I thought all of them were the same, thats precisely why I bought the Wilson 5.8-ish (dont even know what it was) at a sporting goods store: I just had tried a 6.1 Classic and thought it must be practically the same just diff color!

Original Post is edited, includes the link.
 
Part of the problem around here is that people think they have to play with the tour/heavy version of a racket to be a better player... which couldn't be farther from the truth.

It's a different game that it was 20 years ago.
 
DustinW said:
Part of the problem around here is that people think they have to play with the tour/heavy version of a racket to be a better player... which couldn't be farther from the truth.

It's a different game that it was 20 years ago.
Click to expand...

I like "tweeners", I think EVERYONE should start with them and add mass as they progress. I switched from my Wilson 6.1 and went down on weighr because my wrist started to hurt.

Once you know your specs or at least the neighborhood you feel comfortable in, its about the "feel". I stick with Babolat because of feel mostly, even though I try other brands and really enjoy going for a hit.

My theory is that we, the people who go into forums, talk/write/learn about specs, materials, technologies etc, are the minority. Just like when I started, most of the general tennis public go by what theyre familiar with or see on tv.
 
pabletion said:
"While discussing with a [racquet] company about an updated line, I bemoaned it was a shame that it didn’t include a heavier “Tour” or “Pro” version. The rep responded: “For you and the six people who would buy it.”

Pretty accurate quote from an interesting read:
http://www.tennis.com/gear/2016/09/...nds-we-learned-about-seasons-final-slam/61147

Are we the TWO PERCENT of the tennis consumer population? I mean, the ones who dont go about the hype od new technologies and paintjobs, but are educated enough regarding racquet specs, or at least are AWARE there's such a thing as SPECS?

According to the article, racquet companies are going after the masses, and we're not them, the masses are the recreational players, who look at Nadal and Federer swinging their sticks and immediately go for them, because "they have to be the best out there".

Tweener racquets are in, few exceptions out there, most of them have to do with what Federer uses, but the majority of rec players are goinf to feel comfortable with a sub 11oz frame, "just like Nadal's".

The author doesnt mention the frame he wishes had a TOUR version, but I'm gonna guess its the new hyped Pure Strike '17, which in fact left out the Tour version on this ocasion.

I'm a Babolat fan and I've enjoyed their more "traditional" frames for about 10 years (Pure Control, Pure Storm, Pure Strike), but I'm specially impressed by their marketing strategies and their Research & Development team what the article talks about is spot on: get juniors playing with your frames, develop a "taste" for them and you'll have them for life.

Only the "purists", part of the TWO PERCENT will continue to enjoy and go for the Prestiges, 6.1's, 200g racquets.
Click to expand...


Well said...esp this line as I go to USTA junior tournaments and I see well above 50% using Babolats.Once kids starts playing with Babolat at a young age and developed their strokes and muscle memory with AeroPro or PureDrive racquets it's extremely difficult to adopt to Prestige type of racquets.
 
Has nothign to do with not being hyped for the latest tech but that the vast majority of the market can not use a 12+ oz racquet.

And judging my the marketplace here after the RF97 came out, a lot of people on this forum cant handle heavy racquets.
 
DustinW said:
Part of the problem around here is that people think they have to play with the tour/heavy version of a racket to be a better player... which couldn't be farther from the truth.

It's a different game that it was 20 years ago.
Click to expand...
Then again, 20 years ago the tour version was quite a bit heavier.

It's geared towards light frames now. For better and for worse.


----------------------------
Volkl super g 10 midplus
 
The two percent who aren't the ninety-eight percent who have been miseducated by dip#### marketers and reps who have no idea how to do their jobs. Guys who in trying to forcefeed us a consistent, decades-long diet of LIGHTER-FASTER-STRONGER!!!!111, have managed to turn off entire generations of buyers, and kill the sport simultaneously.

"Hey, we've got the most popular sport in the world on our hands!"

"Sweet! Let's change everything about it and in the process destroy everyone's elbows!"

$$$CHA-CHING$$$

People buy what the suits tell them to buy, and then they keep buying -- or don't -- depending on their satisfaction with the results. Tell your rep pal next time you see him that if he and Todd from Accounting would pull their collective head from their collective arse, and would tell the public to buy, "The Buttery, Flexible, Elegant, Solid Feel The Pros Demand," instead, tennis just might become a thing again, and then he'd still have a job in five years. Which he totally won't as things stand right now.

The public votes with their wallets, and they're voting "no thanks" to modern tennis.
 
Last edited:
pabletion said:
Tweener racquets are in, few exceptions out there, most of them have to do with what Federer uses, but the majority of rec players are goinf to feel comfortable with a sub 11oz frame,
Click to expand...

what's all this moaning about all the sub-11 ounce racquets out there?? Every manufacturer seems to offer racquets well over 11 ounces, and it's very easy to make them heavier if you prefer.
 
I think the reps get brain washed into saying what you quoted. It's a real shame that they're trying to market stuff to adults that a 12 year old would use. Those light racquets are toys and I get no joy in using such a thing. Just as well you can buy some 330g racquets from companies like Volkl, Yonex and Wilson because the light stuff is s waste if time.
 
Tuskarr said:
Has nothign to do with not being hyped for the latest tech but that the vast majority of the market can not use a 12+ oz racquet.

And judging my the marketplace here after the RF97 came out, a lot of people on this forum cant handle heavy racquets.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you have to be a real beast to handle a stick with mass like that.
77-78girlstennis.jpg
 
Weight can be easily fixed. Lead&Silicone.

Modern frames are way too stiff and I miss true midsize and std frames!

sent from my E5
 
DustinW said:
It's a different game that it was 20 years ago.
Click to expand...

No it's not. That's only on tv, at the very highest levels. For the rec player, the game is exactly the same as it was 20 years ago, I mean, you do realize that in 1996 wood was already obsolete.

If you don't believe me, join a competitive league. At the 4.5 level, I've lost to opponents aged 20 to 50, and those 50 year olds weren't playing some different version of the game they learnt when they were young.

Tennis is tennis is tennis, regardless of racket or even string. I've never won or lost a match because of a racket.
 
I always look at my frames when I lose a point. Can't be me! :D
Actually, us forum equipment posters are the 1% that are OCD. But I also use to hang out at a place where there would be theoretical arguments about sampling and the appropriate techniques to correct for that sort of bias. Talk about cilia on an ants' butt. :rolleyes:
 
It's very true that TT (and us racquet geeks) do represent a small percentage of the buying public.

We did a bunch of consumer research a year or two ago, and one of the questions we asked was "What exact racquet do you play with?". We asked this of a wide range of players including juniors just starting out, top juniors at academies, the D1 teams at a couple of collages, huge ranges of recreational players of different levels and ages, etc..

We expected answers such as: "I play with the Wilson Blade 98S" or "I play with the lighter model of the new Pure Drive" ... that type of answer.

However by a HUGE margin, the most common type of answer we go was: "I play with the red Wilson" or "I play with the green Prince" .... and even when we tried to pry out more info about the specific model, most people simply didn't know. Color was the first thing they mentioned. Brand second (but not even everyone knew that) This included very accomplished players (and coaches).

And here we are (myself included) worrying about a racquet being 1-2 grams off and such :) hahaha

So yes... TT is not representative of the general tennis public .... but boy is it a fun place for all of us tennis nerds!
 
el sergento said:
No it's not. That's only on tv, at the very highest levels. For the rec player, the game is exactly the same as it was 20 years ago, I mean, you do realize that in 1996 wood was already obsolete.

If you don't believe me, join a competitive league. At the 4.5 level, I've lost to opponents aged 20 to 50, and those 50 year olds weren't playing some different version of the game they learnt when they were young.

Tennis is tennis is tennis, regardless of racket or even string. I've never won or lost a match because of a racket.
Click to expand...

I guess we will have to agree to disagree then... on just about everything you said. Things have definitely changed in the last 20 years (ok, maybe 25-30 years is more accurate). Have you heard of polyester strings???

I am 40 years old and played with a 12.5 oz Prince Graphite in high school with a grip built up to nearly 5". Now I play with an 11 oz Graphene Radical MP with a 3/8" plus overgrip. (For me) a lighter and smaller grip means faster swing speeds, more spin, and way easier to turn defense to offense. And before you ask or assume anything about me, I play in plenty of competitive leagues and I don't lose much at the 4.5 level.

At 4.5 sectionals this year, I played a a guy with the Six.One 95 and saw one Prestige and one Textreme Tour 95. But most (especially the <30 crowd) here hitting PD, APD, and Blades. And somehow, they were doing just fine with those frames that TT deems as too light.

The main point that I was trying to make is that you don't NEED a 12+ oz frame to play at a high level, which is what so many people around here will try to make you believe. Sure... heavier frames will be better for some and their playing style, but it is not mandatory for success.

And juniors are NOT buying heavy frames, so your 2% will continue to decline as time goes on.
 
n8dawg6 said:
paint job = most important racquet attribute
Click to expand...

I think people just easily identify and associate with color. No different than for example describing a car you've seen drive by. You'll probably say something like "that was a blue hatchback"
 
PeterFig said:
It's very true that TT (and us racquet geeks) do represent a small percentage of the buying public.

We did a bunch of consumer research a year or two ago, and one of the questions we asked was "What exact racquet do you play with?". We asked this of a wide range of players including juniors just starting out, top juniors at academies, the D1 teams at a couple of collages, huge ranges of recreational players of different levels and ages, etc..

We expected answers such as: "I play with the Wilson Blade 98S" or "I play with the lighter model of the new Pure Drive" ... that type of answer.

However by a HUGE margin, the most common type of answer we go was: "I play with the red Wilson" or "I play with the green Prince" .... and even when we tried to pry out more info about the specific model, most people simply didn't know. Color was the first thing they mentioned. Brand second (but not even everyone knew that) This included very accomplished players (and coaches).

And here we are (myself included) worrying about a racquet being 1-2 grams off and such :) hahaha

So yes... TT is not representative of the general tennis public .... but boy is it a fun place for all of us tennis nerds!
Click to expand...
from another thread but works here.

Along the same line is the TT equipment gurus. Just looking at the Racquet forum to see all the "scientists" with the MgR/I formulas. Twist and recoil weight theory's. Endless hybrid and tension combinations. With all that fine tuning to find the holygrail, you get the likes of Nick Kyrgios who was asked recently about the size of his racquet head and strings used, he replied simply "wouldn't have clue mate" Obviously he would spank all the TT formula gurus on the court.
 
Let's be honest, you do not need a heavy frame (anymore) to compete at a high level. One of the top amateurs of my country plays with a Wilson Pro (the black yellow one). Unless there is a more heavy version of the stick it must have been 299 gram unstrung. Another talented junior who participated at Future level played with a Microgel mid plus which is 295 gram unstrung.
 
The problem is that racket manufacturers want to constantly sell. That means they're better off by constantly going to the market that will continuously want to buy. That means they want to sell to people who are new coming in to the sport, the people who feel like they can't swing a "heavy" racket anymore when there are easier alternatives, and the people who buy whatever marketing garbage you throw at them. The only people left are those that have a racket, regardless of type, that like it and want to stick to it. For the last category, you don't have that many people, and you'll only sell more rackets when they break a frame or they're sensitive enough to care about dead frames. With the people who buy the marketing hype, they'll buy just about anything, and they'll switch for that honeymoon phase and divorce their rackets just as quickly for something "better". So the real determinants are those who are brand new coming in and those who maybe feel like they're over the hill and want something lighter just because it's available (since it's a potential quick fix). Generally, lighter rackets will sell well to these people. It's not so much the fact that one type of racket is better or worse, it's just that to these markets, that determine most of what's good to sell, lighter rackets tend to be more appealing. If EVERYONE bought a new racket every year that was closest to what they liked, you'd see a decently even spread of rackets being sold. The problem is, there are a lot of people who don't buy a new damn racket every year because they're satisfied with what they have. I bought a ton of K90s before they went off the market. I found something I liked and wanted to stick with. And the only reason I bought new rackets, was because I was running out of those and I went for the closest thing, the more recent BLX ProStaff 90s. Would I buy another racket? Probably not. I might, but not for decades. So even if I mass bought rackets, I'm not as optimal of a target for racket companies to market to compared to people who will buy a new racket every year or 6 months or whatever.

It's not so much that people don't want heavy rackets, it's just that most of the people that do buy very infrequently when compared to those who want or prefer lighter rackets. At the higher levels, people will use whatever they want. And if it's not heavy enough, they can add weight. At the lower levels, they're more likely to blame their racket for their problems and think about a switch (generally, many people who are lesser skilled at anything will blame anything but themselves if things don't go their way). And there are a TON of people at the lower levels.

I mean, at least you guys still get the headsizes you want. I can't find a midsize with a boxed beam anymore. :/ Hopefully the ProStaff 85 will still be around if I need more frames.
 
MikeMechanic said:
Let's be honest, you do not need a heavy frame (anymore) to compete at a high level. One of the top amateurs of my country plays with a Wilson Pro (the black yellow one). Unless there is a more heavy version of the stick it must have been 299 gram unstrung. Another talented junior who participated at Future level played with a Microgel mid plus which is 295 gram unstrung.
Click to expand...

Citing a few low weight rackets out of thousands of players doesn't make a statement accurate. We've known about a few players who play with unstrung weights hovering around 295 grams. One of them was a Wilson user I believe. But this is like saying, you don't need to move to an ~11-12 ounce midsize racket to compete at the top level anymore! Federer and Dimitrov use 12.5+ ounce midsize rackets! Obviously, they've moved to different rackets, but there will always be people who are outliers. Just because THEY can do it, doesn't mean it should be the norm. It could turn into the norm, but to make a premature statement with so little evidence is nothing more than speculation. Also, none of these players were in the top 10. And Nadal several years back said he needed to increase his racket weight to deal with Djokovic's shots. This only encourages the conclusion that while you can get away with lighter rackets, if you want to get to the top, you really need to start looking into having a decent amount of weight on the racket. Nothing heavy, just a decent amount. Something around 12 ounces.
 
Normal-distribution-curve.jpg


I suspect there is a classic distribution curve at work here. The heavier frames will appeal to those at the right hand side of the curve. Racket manufacturers survive, in the main, from those in the middle. Some then provide frames for the more extreme ends. That said, remember that the retailers are also at play here. Smaller retailers will choose what to give space to: and they need to sell.
 
My best rackets have turned out to be the ones that are light-ish in stock form and I customized them myself. Around 365 g static and 360 SW, 6-7 pt HL.
The ones I bought already heavy in stock form all tend to carry too much weight in the throat and if I want to get my preferred SW and balance, the static weight ends up being a bit too high for my liking.
The 2 most important pieces of info about equipment for laymen are:
1. Pros don't use what they advertise
2. Details in specs can make a huge difference to just about everyone's game. In fact I'll go so far as to say that in a lot of cases, the right specs can help correct technical flaws.
 
PeterFig said:
It's very true that TT (and us racquet geeks) do represent a small percentage of the buying public.

We did a bunch of consumer research a year or two ago, and one of the questions we asked was "What exact racquet do you play with?". We asked this of a wide range of players including juniors just starting out, top juniors at academies, the D1 teams at a couple of collages, huge ranges of recreational players of different levels and ages, etc..

We expected answers such as: "I play with the Wilson Blade 98S" or "I play with the lighter model of the new Pure Drive" ... that type of answer.

However by a HUGE margin, the most common type of answer we go was: "I play with the red Wilson" or "I play with the green Prince" .... and even when we tried to pry out more info about the specific model, most people simply didn't know. Color was the first thing they mentioned. Brand second (but not even everyone knew that) This included very accomplished players (and coaches).

And here we are (myself included) worrying about a racquet being 1-2 grams off and such :) hahaha

So yes... TT is not representative of the general tennis public .... but boy is it a fun place for all of us tennis nerds!
Click to expand...

That's some pretty cool information.

I wonder if it's that we're tennis nerds or product nerds.

I generally know a lot of things about the products that I buy - cars, computers, phones, electronics, clothes, etc., razors, etc. as I like to do a little research (or sometimes a lot) on purchases. The internet makes this fairly easy to do. I know a lot of other people that are similar - they research products before they buy unless the products are trivial.

I know that I could ask 20 people in my office about what phone they have and they'd all be able to tell me the make and model but I work in a building full of nerds.
 
This is an interesting thread. I certainly have my racquet preferences, have always used Wilson Pro Staff. Currently use WPS 6.1 - 90. I prefer heavier racquets. However, it seems to me that a lot of folks on here go to great lengths to customize their stick and continuously try different strings, etc. I suspect with all of the customization, there is probably little or no difference in the players results. "The juice isn't worth the squeeze." IMO, the racquet isn't going to make much or any difference in your game and you can get used to playing with almost any racquet. You play at a certain level and the racquet really doesn't make much or any difference at all. But hey, there is a new racquet coming out with remote control and all kinds of settings....[emoji3]
 
dr7 said:
This is an interesting thread. I certainly have my racquet preferences, have always used Wilson Pro Staff. Currently use WPS 6.1 - 90. I prefer heavier racquets. However, it seems to me that a lot of folks on here go to great lengths to customize their stick and continuously try different strings, etc. I suspect with all of the customization, there is probably little or no difference in the players results. "The juice isn't worth the squeeze." IMO, the racquet isn't going to make much or any difference in your game and you can get used to playing with almost any racquet. You play at a certain level and the racquet really doesn't make much or any difference at all. But hey, there is a new racquet coming out with remote control and all kinds of settings....[emoji3]
Click to expand...

I spent a few years improving fitness, losing weight and improving technique and then picked up a set of frames back in 2011/2012 that I thought would work well for my game. It turns out that they were too heavy at first but I got used to them and they have been my main frames for about five years. The only other frames that I've used since then are the previous generation (all of my current frames needed restringing) and the RF97 which I did a playtest for. I am back to those old frames.

If you take care of the other stuff like fitness, technique, nutrition, etc., then I don't see any problems with fine-tuning your racquet. I think that finding a racquet is a big of a pain as some of the other improvements because there are so many of them out there and you can multiply that by the number of strings, string tension, etc. I do think that it's good that there's lots of variety in frames but I wonder if it would be simpler for the racquet companies to make fewer frames and offer customization services.

The biggest annoyance for me is the lack of XL frames. My preferred would probably be 27.75 inches but I'd like to try 28 inches someday.
 
If you do a proper unit turn then the heavy weight shouldn't be a problem. I have seen tiny fragile guys hitting cannonballs with 333 gram (unstrung) frames.
 
DustinW said:
I guess we will have to agree to disagree then... on just about everything you said. Things have definitely changed in the last 20 years (ok, maybe 25-30 years is more accurate). Have you heard of polyester strings???

I am 40 years old and played with a 12.5 oz Prince Graphite in high school with a grip built up to nearly 5". Now I play with an 11 oz Graphene Radical MP with a 3/8" plus overgrip. (For me) a lighter and smaller grip means faster swing speeds, more spin, and way easier to turn defense to offense. And before you ask or assume anything about me, I play in plenty of competitive leagues and I don't lose much at the 4.5 level.

At 4.5 sectionals this year, I played a a guy with the Six.One 95 and saw one Prestige and one Textreme Tour 95. But most (especially the <30 crowd) here hitting PD, APD, and Blades. And somehow, they were doing just fine with those frames that TT deems as too light.

The main point that I was trying to make is that you don't NEED a 12+ oz frame to play at a high level, which is what so many people around here will try to make you believe. Sure... heavier frames will be better for some and their playing style, but it is not mandatory for success.

And juniors are NOT buying heavy frames, so your 2% will continue to decline as time goes on.
Click to expand...

I get what you're saying. But you miss the point. What I said was that today's lighter frames and poly strings haven't changed the game in any significant way. Whatever shots people are hitting today aren't significantly different from the shots people used to hit 20 years ago. The game hasn't changed, at the end of the day, it's still the player who moves the best and misses the least that usually wins.

Also, we already had super light, headlight rackets 20 years ago. I remember playing with some Prince (Typhoon?) and neon pink Donnay that were super light when I was a kid . And what you mention doesn't really apply to the game as much as it does to your game, especially the part about your grip size. It sounds like you were just playing with the wrong grip size?

As for juniors, well they tend to be small and weak so of course they play with light frames. And juniors buy, or are provided with whatever is on the market at the time. Also, as they get older and stronger, they add weight and end up with 12+ oz frames. Again, the game hasn't changed that much, at least not in my experience.
 
We are the two percent? No way are we that large a percentage of the tennis racquet buying public.

I'm no mathematician, but I would guess that two percent of the racquet buying population is significantly higher that the few on here who will closely assess every spec of a racquet before considering using it.

The market is aimed heavily at the very recreational end, to get more people playing tennis and buying the products. We who already know what specs we want and what racquets work best for us do not need to be convinced to play.

Which is why many brands will put out mostly light racquets that newbies will look at and think "that feels nice and light and easy to use". Sold.

For those who want heavy.....those are offered a reel of lead tape.

I think that's just the way it is now.
 
robbo1970 said:
We are the two percent? No way are we that large a percentage of the tennis racquet buying public.

I'm no mathematician, but I would guess that two percent of the racquet buying population is significantly higher that the few on here who will closely assess every spec of a racquet before considering using it.

The market is aimed heavily at the very recreational end, to get more people playing tennis and buying the products. We who already know what specs we want and what racquets work best for us do not need to be convinced to play.

Which is why many brands will put out mostly light racquets that newbies will look at and think "that feels nice and light and easy to use". Sold.

For those who want heavy.....those are offered a reel of lead tape.

I think that's just the way it is now.
Click to expand...

That works for Costco.
 
Looking back, I don't remember anybody our HS team hit with the RPMs we see today. The heavy balls back then weren't that heavy by today standards. Maybe that's why 12.5 oz sticks were considered light back then.
 
wsk429 said:
Looking back, I don't remember anybody our HS team hit with the RPMs we see today. The heavy balls back then weren't that heavy by today standards. Maybe that's why 12.5 oz sticks were considered light back then.
Click to expand...

Same with me back in college days but we were using 65 sq in racquets. Not much margin for error hitting a heavy topspin shot. Borg and Vilas and some others managed it but I don't think that their RPMs were anything like what you have today, even at the rec level.
 
movdqa said:
Same with me back in college days but we were using 65 sq in racquets. Not much margin for error hitting a heavy topspin shot. Borg and Vilas and some others managed it but I don't think that their RPMs were anything like what you have today, even at the rec level.
Click to expand...

The flatter shots would also explained why so few inside out winners when replies were weak and short. This meant rallies on average lasted longer.
 
I would say that I really enjoy hitting w/ a more classic racket. However, a little lighter (11.4 for me), lets me react to funny clay bounces, my poor footwork, etc. So that I win more points.

it has become a discussion for me- what feels better or what plays better. The two are not synonymous. Perhaps, that is why there are more injuries now too. A race car is not a comfortable ride.
 
Boyd Clary said:
I would say that I really enjoy hitting w/ a more classic racket. However, a little lighter (11.4 for me), lets me react to funny clay bounces, my poor footwork, etc. So that I win more points.

it has become a discussion for me- what feels better or what plays better. The two are not synonymous. Perhaps, that is why there are more injuries now too. A race car is not a comfortable ride.
Click to expand...

Yup. Comfort doesn't necessarily mean better performance.
 
I began to play with 14 oz woodie in the beginning of the '80s. Don't like light racquets at all. All this modern sticks feel like cheap stuff. I got me a lot of old racquets I regularly use to play.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

socallefty
Why isn’t there more buzz about the new Babolat Pure Strike?
Replies
19
Views
6K
phanamous
phanamous
H
Babolat Pure Strike Tour vs Babolat Pure Strike 18x20
Replies
38
Views
8K
smalahove
smalahove
G
Babolat Pure Strike Tour vs. Pure Control Tour
Replies
18
Views
10K
TimothyO
T
L
Who benefits best from the Babolat tour versions?
Replies
13
Views
1K
Lazarus26
L
racquet_jedi
Radical copies...
Replies
7
Views
885
SteveI
SteveI
Back
Top