What makes pro stock racquets better?

[Blahovic]

I've often seen people talking about pro stock racquets being made of better materials than retail racquets.

I find this easy to believe as pros will be much more exacting than recreational players, but what does "better materials" actually mean? What makes the pro stocks better?

As well, I thought some pros just keep using retail racquets that they played with when they were a junior?

 

[Return_Ace]

I mean, one of the main principles of the substance abuse trade is to control the supply.

Get those pro's addicted to these "special" layups made with "magical" materials that only the Austrian factory can produce.

That way if they ever think about leaving the Head contract, they can no longer function on the "inferior" retail layups and will have to come crawling back to get some of that "quality" fix.... and now they're hooked.

 

[lelopez]

Easy, it doesn't. They are different, not necessarily better. Most of the hype is placebo induced.

 

[cha cha]

You have to understand the internet paradox.
Most of the internet posters who can actually play tennis are using retail frames.
Most of the the internet users who are using pro stocks for their superior feel cannot actually play tennis.

 

[cha cha]

I hit with Jiří Veselý's frame last summer. It is either H22, or 19. I cannot remember the numbers. It was a heavy, stable tennis racket. Good for sure, but I do not see the point of paying USD 500 for it.

 

[Crocodile]

For me it’s like this - Wilson Ultra Pro retail - 305g and 63 RA whereas pro stock H19 already 340g and 57 RA - the pro stock is better where’s the retail version needs a stack of lead and leather grips to get it right especially if you need to do this with 3 or more frames.

 

[Roquestil]

It’s better for pros: custom made, QC. For recreational players I think nothing. I think the term pro really hits the nail in prostock.

 

[mad dog1]

I've often seen people talking about pro stock racquets being made of better materials than retail racquets.

I find this easy to believe as pros will be much more exacting than recreational players, but what does "better materials" actually mean? What makes the pro stocks better?

As well, I thought some pros just keep using retail racquets that they played with when they were a junior?

Anything that is harder to acquire is automatically better! Pro stocks aren’t readily available to the general public and thus must be better.

 

[asifallasleep]

Historically pro stocks could be customized to reach specs that retail frames could only dream of. High sw frames in low static weights with hl balances. This seems to be changing somewhat with the release of a few new retail sticks. Quality control and the materials used in the layup in pro stocks are still superior IMO. Of course there are always exceptions..........

Anyone under a 5.0, or someone not really playing a lot of tournaments, it's not really going to matter that much.

 

[Trinity110]

Historically pro stocks could be customized to reach specs that retail frames could only dream of. High sw frames in low static weights with hl balances. This seems to be changing somewhat with the release of a few new retail sticks. Quality control and the materials used in the layup in pro stocks are still superior IMO. Of course there are always exceptions..........

Anyone under a 5.0, or someone not really playing a lot of tournaments, it's not really going to matter that much.

Or it will matter to the player's detriment. Some people don't want to believe that there is a wide gulf between the # 1 player and the #500 player, and a ten times wider gulf between that #500 player and their "5.0" self.

Just about no one needs Djokovic's racquet. Nadal would not benefit from it. And vice versa. And neither could play with Isner's, at least not as well as with their own.

 

[vsbabolat]

Nothing

 

[temnik]

.

 

[SinneGOAT]

A pure drive or extreme would be better for the majority of the public than a pro stock H19 or PT57. Majority can’t swing those racquets as long as an extreme or pure aero.

 

[Keizer]

To be fair 95% of rec players probably don't know what prostocks are. They receive a lot of attention on here partly because we have several older posters who grew up using flexier frames and are finding it difficult to replace them with the current offerings.

 

[Roquestil]

To be fair 95% of rec players probably don't know what prostocks are. They receive a lot of attention on here partly because we have several older posters who grew up using flexier frames and are finding it difficult to replace them with the current offerings.

Indeed, although this thread just might be for that 5% just to geek out a little. Every comment has been right, @temnik summed it up pretty well.

 

[Hit 'em clean]

Nothing... other than pros get to pick frames that are customized to their specs. That can mean swing weight, static weight, specific grip pallets, and different drill/string patterns. Many of the very top pros are using older frames that are 'discontinued' to you and I but were off the shelf sticks that were available to us 10-15 or so years ago and they keep them around. Those players grew up playing those frames and are loathe to switch. There are a few pro stocks that might have a different layup as well... but there is nothing magical about them... the magic is in the player swinging it.

Many current pros are using old Radicals, Prestiges, Pro Staffs, etc. It's like the equivalent of pro golfers playing with forged blade irons. It's very possible those older frames will still be played with in 10-20 years, but it's more likely that the new generations of players will be playing with some version of player frames we play with today but will be long discontinued by then.

 

[Novichok]

A pure drive or extreme would be better for the majority of the public than a pro stock H19 or PT57. Majority can’t swing those racquets as long as an extreme or pure aero.

AFAIK, Pure Drives are more widely used on the tour compared to the PT57s. These PT57 racquets seem to be simply too unforgiving for the modern game even on the highest levels of professional tennis. Like Andy Murray once said, the 18x20 version has a "peanut sized sweet spot".
PT57 not being good for rec players is only half true. Most pros stay away from that racquet and for a good reason.

 

[mnttlrg]

I wonder how many of these commenters have actually tried one.

I got my hands on someone's H22, and it was REALLY comfortable on my arm. Good but nothing otherworldly on performance but not as cheap and chintzy feeling as the material they use for retail, imo.

However, most players would not like the typical pro stock specs and won't see enough difference in performance to be worth the money.

 

[Keizer]

I wonder how many of these commenters have actually tried one.

I got my hands on someone's H22, and it was REALLY comfortable on my arm. Good but nothing otherworldly on performance but not as cheap and chintzy feeling as the material they use for retail, imo.

However, most players would not like the typical pro stock specs and won't see enough difference in performance to be worth the money.

It depends on the pro stock. If you’re buying a PT layup from Head or an H19/H22, you’re probably getting a flexier layup than the retail mold/PJ. However, a lot of pro stocks are just old retail models in new paint or the same layup as the retail model but without the commercial weights. Don’t think the latter (which a lot of pros use these days) will offer you much more than the retail.

 

[mnttlrg]

It depends on the pro stock.

I agree with your post. I think what stood out to me was the choices of where and how to add weight to the grip, hoop, etc.

ex. That H22 had some custom silicone in the handle that felt cushy on impact.

I also remember from shopping custom Head frames that they often start out lighter than retail specs in order to add weight more precisely. So if you want a custom Speed Pro, they start at 10.5ish somethingerather and then determine how much of everything to put where and why. I think there are a few misinformed people who take the original retail model specs and simply add lead to make an inaccurate calculation of what the pro players' specs are.

So I'm saying all of that to say that they're not quite the same as the old retail, and definitely different from the new retail.

 

[mad dog1]

I agree with your post. I think what stood out to me was the choices of where and how to add weight to the grip, hoop, etc.

ex. That H22 had some custom silicone in the handle that felt cushy on impact.

I also remember from shopping custom Head frames that they often start out lighter than retail specs in order to add weight more precisely. So if you want a custom Speed Pro, they start at 10.5ish somethingerather and then determine how much of everything to put where and why. I think there are a few misinformed people who take the original retail model specs and simply add lead to make an inaccurate calculation of what the pro players' specs are.

So I'm saying all of that to say that they're not quite the same as the old retail, and definitely different from the new retail.

At the end of the day, pro stock or retail, the most important variable is the player wielding the racquet.

 

[4sound]

"Pro Stock" rackets are customized from a bare frame (also called "hair pins") with specific specifications the pro player desires. The "layup" of the frame has a particular stiffness, flex points & thickness. Different manufacturers have codes for the different "hair pins". These are typically longer, then cut down to desired length (example: Djokovic rackets are 27.1" not 27". His string pattern is 18x19. There is no Head Speed with 18x19 on the retail market & I believe his racket swing weight is something above 350)
Grip shape is selected (Head type grips are more rectangular vs Wilson)
After that, weight is added in the handle and under the head guard.
They are typically painted to look like the current retail version.
The top pro's usually get +20 rackets per year.
Some pro's want different spec rackets, most want them all the same.

It makes me laugh when I see someone buy an old "pro stock" racket that make it out into the public & they think because they have a "pro stock" racket it will help their game. The specs usually don't match up.

I still have 5x of my old Pro Stock Head rackets (TGK237.2 Prestige Mid but with a 16x19 string pattern), customized to my specs years ago.
I hit with them from time to time but they're a bit more demanding to play with now compared to the retail rackets today.

There are so many racket options today on the retail market. Or get some lead tape and try a bunch of different string setups & you can find something that works for you.

 

[time410s]

I think the simplest and most agreeable thing is that the pro stocks are much more accurate in their production consistency and ant imperfection is ironed out very professionally where as little corners might be cut a bit on retail or slight difference in weight or balance.

A pro needs many rackets and they all better be exactly alike. So the consistency is very important from one to the other

But yes, sometimes the material is better but that's a subjective term. Specific is more accurate if we're generalizing and it depends on the racket.

But when I used to hit with the modern day pro staff exclusively for a year and then hit once with my friend's h19 18x20, I really felt like I needed one. There was something so uniquely plush and heavy about how it hit. Was one of the best feelings I ever had swinging through a ball at the time. It set me on a journey to find that again because I knew it was out there.

But honeymoons are just that. Such a pleasure could come from retail frame. And if you go pro and want that frame to keep being made as it is...bam, your frame is now a prostock frame.

The most lasting influence it has had on me is an appreciation for quality control which is why it's hard for be to look outside of the Yonex brand. And now, maybe Diadem. Those two have very respectable QC tolerance that nearly compares to that of prostock.