oldmanyellingatcloud
Semi-Pro
this is would be a welcome and massive addition in and of itself. how are they able to sell the TK57.5 for so much less than new models like G360+?
Why don't companies sell the actual racquets used by the players?
- Thread starter MiamiWeekendWarrior
- Start date
this is would be a welcome and massive addition in and of itself. how are they able to sell the TK57.5 for so much less than new models like G360+?
BlueB
Legend
"Specific graphene pricing data is hard to come, but current estimates peg the production cost of graphene at about US$100 per gram."
dr325i
G.O.A.T.
You are talking high end Graphene pieces, I am talking the dust/powder (leftovers)…
People get all excited over what they can't have or may not even exist. H19 and H22 are great examples. Highly desired until Wilson starts selling Ultra Tours and Blade Pros. Now people want Steams. People wanted Pure Drives and Aeros in a 98 head size. Babolat makes the 98 VS lines almost everyone still buys the 100's. Very few players want the Aero Storm until it gets discontinued for lack of sales. Babolat brings it back and no one buys them. Ezone XI's and DR's and Vcore 95Ds and every generation of Radical, Speed, Extreme at some point in time could have been had for $129 on clearance. Of course there are racquets on tour that have never seen a retail shelf but a high percentage of what's played on tour can be replicated with a once retail frame, lead tape and silicone.
BlueB
Legend
Fair enough.
Crazy Finn
Hall of Fame
Yeah. I was all excited to the try the Ultra Tour. Seemed what would be great for me. I demoed it a few times, realized that while I probably wouldn't make hardly any errors with that stick, I also would hit zero winners and likely not win many matches. You need to be a more of a player than I am to get anything out of it.
am1899
Legend
Just curious if you added weight. UT is anemic in stock form.
Crazy Finn
Hall of Fame
I did not. I didn't know much about weight and tungsten tape back then. Frankly, I don't have the racquet head speed to generate a ton of power or spin with frames that low powered. Maybe, with a 40 lbs poly with punch, now, I'd be ok. But, it's a racquet I think I'd like, but it's for a player that I am not.
am1899
Legend
FWIW, I don’t find the UT all that low powered. It just needs a little weight to make it sing. Mine are about 345g strung now, but just shy of 340g was serviceable for me as well.
Crazy Finn
Hall of Fame
I suspect you're a much better - higher level - player than I am.
am1899
Legend
Well then the previous chap was right- they *are* leaving money on the table.
Also I don't buy what you say: the pt57a layup they won't use on rec sticks any more originated in sticks which were not *that* heavy and which were known for their great feel. Why never use that again? The only reason can be the materials are more expensive and they wish to make more money...
Lots of people play with the rf97 and heavy six.ones/ blade pro etc
dr325i
G.O.A.T.
I have explained the reason why the PT57A2 layup is not used in the retail frames. The IP.
As the retail sticks are laid from scratch in China, the IP cannot be shared with them. The cost of the PT vs. TGK layup is not an issue.
dr325i
G.O.A.T.
Lots? No.
Therefore, Even though anything you put the RF name on it will sell well, the RF97A is nowhere close to be their best seller...
Also, the retail RF97A is not exactly Roger's spec
Automatix
Legend
In 2015 it was.
Top-Selling Racquets at Specialty Stores (by year-to-date dollars, USA)
Jan.-Dec. 2015
1. Babolat Pure Drive 2015 (MP)
2. Babolat Aero Pro Drive (MP)
3. Wilson Pro Staff 97 (MP)
4. Wilson Pro Staff RF 97 Autograph (MP)
5. Babolat Pure Aero (100) 2016 (MP)
PaddyDutch
Semi-Pro
Old and US only but still surprising. What is the source of this?
Automatix
Legend
TIA stats published in RSI Magazine
April 2016 - Racquet Sports Industry
www.tennisindustrymag.com
Last edited:
Automatix
Legend
Turns out we don't have to go back so far...
Top-Selling Racquetsat Specialty Stores
By year-to-date dollars, Jan.-Sept. 2021
1. Babolat Pure Drive 2021
2. Babolat Pure Aero 2019
3. Wilson Clash 100 2019
4. Wilson Pro Staff 97 V13 2021
5. Wilson Pro Staff 97 RF V13
January 2022 Racquet Sports Industry Magazine | PDF | Racquet Sports | Sports
Champions of Tennis 2021 Awards
dr325i
G.O.A.T.
something tells me the data is not accurate as there is no way that RF97A outsells the BladeTurns out we don't have to go back so far...
Top-Selling Racquetsat Specialty Stores
By year-to-date dollars, Jan.-Sept. 2021
1. Babolat Pure Drive 2021
2. Babolat Pure Aero 2019
3. Wilson Clash 100 2019
4. Wilson Pro Staff 97 V13 2021
5. Wilson Pro Staff 97 RF V13
Page 18 (as in 18 in the "viewer" not on the page itself).January 2022 Racquet Sports Industry Magazine | PDF | Racquet Sports | Sports
Champions of Tennis 2021 Awardswww.scribd.com
however, as established before, anything that has the “RF” on it will sell much better than any other players racket so this is by no means a good indicator that Head should release Novaks or Andy’s frames, etc.
oldmanyellingatcloud
Semi-Pro
They could easily take the 113 or 346 and bake in a modern layup (167) without the crap. Call it the Speed Tour and release 16x19 and 18x20 like they did for Verdasco, Zverev, etc. Mark up the hell out of the price because it's the public getting access to Tour frames. They could similarly take the 260 and bake in a modern layup (260) and call it the Radical Tour, which it already kind of is.
THey don't which is still a question of will. But I suppose when you have a large market share of a few very rare racquets and an in with the supplier, it's easy to dismiss these sorts of conversations
THey don't which is still a question of will. But I suppose when you have a large market share of a few very rare racquets and an in with the supplier, it's easy to dismiss these sorts of conversations
Curtennis
Hall of Fame
I definitely see far more late model pro staffs than I do late model blades at the courts. No idea what the RF % is though.
bobeeto
Hall of Fame
i wonder what the data set is, i coach at the club level and not a single pro staff to be found for players under 18…
mtommer
Hall of Fame
So the 360+ has the exact same layup, design, etc. as the Auxetic and the only differences are the technology and paint job?
dr325i
G.O.A.T.
I am not sure how you got that from the above?
The layups are different. The technology is a part of the layup. The mold and string pattern are the same.
mtommer
Hall of Fame
Which is something that is often times minimized and contributes far more to the changes than the touted "technology". For example, "Graphene 360..." is most likely just graphite particles mixed in to the epoxy resin but accounts for a very small portion of the racquets overall mechanical properties compared with the standard carbon fibre prepregs that have been in use for quite awhile now. Hence, the marketing to sell "technology" over "we moved a piece from here to there" (which I do get, btw) But hey, by all means, if you have the spectography results that show otherwise with regards to graphene's "great" addition for Head racquets, I'm certainly open to reading them.
dr325i
G.O.A.T.
A lot of true observation there. Major changes are attributed to the actual layup updates. The technology itself has very little (or nothing) to do with it. There is a very small amount of Graphene particles mixed in for the Graphene rackets, otherwise, it would very easy to prove there is none.
auxetic, on the other hand is a different kind of technology that mainly deals with the dampening properties and to me the effect is obvious as the Auxetic frames are more muted on the off center shots than the previous generations
galapagos
Hall of Fame
that's only an indicator it doesn't really matter what frame racquet company will sell. All about the marketing. So putting a real frame on the shelfs with a name on it wouldn't hurt Head much if at all becasue well...Novak xd and it goes to all brands of course.
HOWEVER now with all the online reviews market became maybe more "customer" friendly. Endorsements are still main point of the marketing but online reviews are a bit more honest at least (good frame/bad frame rather than "endorsed by")
Anyway Speed Pro is an amazing frame. I would like to see Novaks frame on the shelf as well just because it's honest and it's inspirational but as an addition or limited release every 4 years for example. Speed Pro has it's own place on the tour and shouldn't be killed. Let's wait few more years and I guess we will see more Speed Pro users.
dr325i
G.O.A.T.
The Speed line is Head’s best selling line. And it is designed to cover broad market: good sweet spot, good power, good control (Pro especially), excellent spin, lighter versions, even customizable options with lighter spec.
on the other hand, releasing Novaks actual frame would offer very small sweet spot, very hard to hit with since not maneuverable at recreational level, great control, limited spin access and ok power that becomes challenging after first 20 minutes…
To me, it sounds like the second one would be a waste of resources and would appeal to the limited crowd
Similarly, with the original PT57A (either 18x20 or 16x19) - soft, low power, small sweet spot. Some of us may prefer it but the majority of the martlet does not see the value…
galapagos
Hall of Fame
you can't switch your opinion based on the brand. quote "RF97A is selling good because of Federer" and "Speed Pro is selling good because it's an awesome frame". Maybe RF97A is as good and it's all very subjective right? It's hard to distinguish the ratio of sales how much is because of the endorsement and how much because of the frame itself.
don't get me wrong - I think Speed Pro is a better frame because it should "in theory" suit the broader spectrum of players skill level and in general is more "user friendly" . IMO tennis should go into that direction especially if we look at the regular customer market and not "pro level market" and over time tour level players might come to same conclusion (why make tennis more difficult?)
Murray tried to switch but at the end didn't. Was it because of the frame? Or maybe he is an old dog and he just follows his feel (at the end perhaps most important aspect in stroke execusion)
and btw I think "difficult" frames create "perfect" grinders. I think about Djokovic and Murray here. and there is a "new wave" of players that are maybe not as "perfect" but they can hit blasting winners and have crazy fast hands with their "easier to use frame". Overall I would choose my racquet based on intention what I want to achieve and what tennis player I want to be while brands overall are pushing you the frame with no other choice and trying to tell you it's "Djokovic style" while Speed Pro is more "aggresive". Djokovic adapted to THIS frame and that adaptation made him who he is.
@dandan.tennis
dr325i
G.O.A.T.
A lot of recreational players choose the racket based on intention what playing style they want to mimic and that choice limits their potential in the end. Intuitive Tennis guy has a good point and video about it.
However, I’ve been sticking with my choice, smaller SS, 95 sq in thin beam, softer, lower powered frame
TTMR
Hall of Fame
Exactly, most rec tennis players are upper middle class and above, and can afford new marketing gimmicks every couple of years. Compared to their BMW or latest iPhone, a $200 Babolat Aero every two or three years is a bargain.
Poor players learn to play fine with the off the shelf Walmart or Dick's frame.
DerPflegerDUS
New User
The arguments of a professional frame compared to a normal commercial frame are actually logical. The biggest problem would be the low forgiveness of mistakes, that is, if the recreational player does not hit exactly, he has no fun or success in the game, that makes sense to me
DerPflegerDUS
New User
But how about longevity? Can the professional frame be used longer than the standard one? Maybe the materials in the professional frame are of higher quality and it lasts "longer" or does it make no difference?
mtommer
Hall of Fame
It's not really a quality issue. Commercial frames are made to appeal to as large a group as possible for a particular interest (example a group who like control frames or a group that prefers more power frames) whereas pro stock frames are going to be tailored more for a specific individual or need.
mtommer
Hall of Fame
I wonder how true that is. What I mean by that is if that mimicry is what leads them to actually picking up and continuing with tennis, without it, they aren't even playing which would be an even bigger limiter on their potential.
mtommer
Hall of Fame
You know what that means, right? Buy up all the models now so in a few years you can make a killing.
brownbearfalling
Hall of Fame
Wilson clash is the perfect example of why brands should separate their recreational racquet design with their pro department. Clash is designed for the recreational player and the public recognizes it. The pace of play, swing speeds, and force at impact is different. I would love to see some real life footage of a pro in playing a clash and telling us their true opinion. My guess is that they will say it is mushy and has no feel. Where as recreational players call it “comfortable”. We should be thankful that brands design racquets around the recreational player. They should do more public prototype testing, larger sampling, allow more of the public to be involved in their design. Doesn’t that sound good? Rather than allow ONE person to determine the design of a racquet. Would you want to take a medication based on a clinical trial of ONE person (maybe your favorite celebrity) or tested on thousands of people over multiple years.
that said the difference between pros frames and retail frames are not as different as you think. Keep in mind those pros were once juniors/ beginners using retail frames. Most pro frames are largely based on older molds.
that said the difference between pros frames and retail frames are not as different as you think. Keep in mind those pros were once juniors/ beginners using retail frames. Most pro frames are largely based on older molds.
vsbabolat
Talk Tennis Guru
There are Pros that use the Clash. An example is Madison Brengle off the top of my head.
ollinger
G.O.A.T.
The greatest paintjob hoax in all of sport is certainly NASCAR. And yet one sees people driving Chevy sedans with Dale's number "3" decaled on the back. I wonder what NASCAR will do in a few years when there are no more sedans from American manufacturers? Fake SUV bodies over a tubular racing space frame??
ollinger
G.O.A.T.
The finest rack(et) in the WTA
vsbabolat
Talk Tennis Guru
Ford has the Mustang body over tubular frame. I liked it when they actually took real stock cars and raced them. Those days a long over.
socallefty
G.O.A.T.
I guess the racquet companies don’t think they will make much profit from doing so since there are a very limited number of players who will play well with the racquets that pros play with. Mass audience appeal is for light, thick beam, head-heavy racquets with big sweet spots that allow players with slow swing speed to generate power/depth - they don’t have to offer precise control because the majority of players aim for large targets (whole court, half the court etc.).
Consider that 4.5+ players are about 5% of the 250,000 players who play USTA leagues and there are more than 20 million tennis players in the US. There might be less than 50,000 players in the US who are 4.5+ - these players also don't change racquets often and many of them still play with racquets they used in college.
Consider that 4.5+ players are about 5% of the 250,000 players who play USTA leagues and there are more than 20 million tennis players in the US. There might be less than 50,000 players in the US who are 4.5+ - these players also don't change racquets often and many of them still play with racquets they used in college.
Ronaldo
Bionic Poster
Guess I am stuck in the 80s,
Many pros also use stock frames with customization. If the point of this thread is why don't the racket companies produce retail rackets similar to the ones used on court by the pros, I can think of 3 reasons why that wouldn't be a good idea.
Cons:
1. Pros play with heavier static weight and higher swing weight. Most amateur athletes don't need a racket that heavy or with that high a SW. Pros are strong and fit professional athletes and the pace and spin they see coming at them is much higher than what rec players see. High SW helps a lot with generating pace & spin and defending against high pace & spin if you can handle it.
2. If manufacturers targeted pro specs, they would likely miss a bit and results would be all over the place. Some frames could even be heavier and have a higher SW than the targeted pro frame. Many pros actually use retail frames or at least retail frames from years ago that are then customized. Better to start with a frame below your target weight and SW and customize up to what you want.
3. Nadal, Federer, Djokovic & Murray have been the big 4 for the last 20 years. Overwhelming majority of rec players do not need and would not play well with a frame exactly like the pros used. People would lose interest in tennis. Women would have the same issue as many of the games stars like Serena, Venus, Osaka, ... used rackets with high SW.
If you want pro setup, you can buy a retail frame, do some research and probably get pretty close to the pro setup if you want to give it a try. I think it would be more of a curiosity experiment vs a step toward improving your tennis. Personally, I like customizing my frames but they still are not as heavy nor do they have as high a swing weight as pro frames.
Cons:
1. Pros play with heavier static weight and higher swing weight. Most amateur athletes don't need a racket that heavy or with that high a SW. Pros are strong and fit professional athletes and the pace and spin they see coming at them is much higher than what rec players see. High SW helps a lot with generating pace & spin and defending against high pace & spin if you can handle it.
2. If manufacturers targeted pro specs, they would likely miss a bit and results would be all over the place. Some frames could even be heavier and have a higher SW than the targeted pro frame. Many pros actually use retail frames or at least retail frames from years ago that are then customized. Better to start with a frame below your target weight and SW and customize up to what you want.
3. Nadal, Federer, Djokovic & Murray have been the big 4 for the last 20 years. Overwhelming majority of rec players do not need and would not play well with a frame exactly like the pros used. People would lose interest in tennis. Women would have the same issue as many of the games stars like Serena, Venus, Osaka, ... used rackets with high SW.
If you want pro setup, you can buy a retail frame, do some research and probably get pretty close to the pro setup if you want to give it a try. I think it would be more of a curiosity experiment vs a step toward improving your tennis. Personally, I like customizing my frames but they still are not as heavy nor do they have as high a swing weight as pro frames.
mtommer
Hall of Fame
So do most high level juniors and highly ranked tennis university/college players. Often times the frames aren't even customized. These same frames today may very well BE the pro stock frames in 15 or 20 years.
