Wilson Blade V9 2024

Can you compare blade v9 power with other racquets you played?I can't understand why some people claim it has a lot power and othera it hasn't. Maybe its QC issue.
First of all I should say this is hard, because you know when you re-tie one shoelace and suddenly the other feels loose, whereas it didn't before? Humans are suckers for relative comparison. I'm also reasonably new to tennis, so take my opinion in that context. However, I am quite a sensitive (yeah, ok, picky too!) and have a lot of experience setting up racing cars and mixing music - so am no strange to A B A comparisons and feeling for small differences.
.
Right now, what's clear in my head is the three rackets I have in my bag and played with yesterday. Out of those, the 98 16x19 has the most power, the 100 v8 noticeably less, and it's early days, but I think very close to that, but just below it, is the 98 18x20 (I'll know more tonight after I've played with the 18x20 properly). Another poster above agreed with this order, so I'm happy with that, but can update after tonight playing properly with the 18x20 for the first time. The other racket I've tried recently is the Head Gravity MP, and that had a little more power than the 98 16x19 (professionally matched to be the same strings, same tension, same SW as my 100), and noticeably less control. Much further back than that, two years ago, I spent a month or two with a Pure Aero 100 and then an eZone 100; that's hard for me to judge as it's so long ago, but unsurprisingly I think they both had more power again, and less control too. So yes, the 98 16x19 isn't a power racket, but it's not lacking power or spin by any means; in fact it has more than my Blade 100 v8.
.
The more salient factor here is the way the 98 16x19 delivers its power. The You Tuber posted recently put it very well, and his words matched mine a few posts up almost word for word, which is interesting as I'd not seen his test when I wrote that. You feel the ball get sucked into the string, which initially sounds nice because you expect to be able to place it afterwards, but that's not the case - it then gets fired out, and the launch angle and power of that firing are a little to judge. This is extremely subtle when hitting with a machine or against the wall, and initially I actually loved this feeling and was ready to buy two and sell my 100s. However, when I took the racket to a club night and played against other people, I was bewildered by the lack of control I had. The difference was the speed of the balls coming in, and my will to place them where I wanted them. I enjoyed the soft buttery feel, but I just wasn't in full control.
.
I should immediately say that I made a mistake matching the 98 16x19 v9 to my 100 v8. I got the all up weight and balance the same, as one can do easily at home, but later on, on a swingweight machine, I discovered that the 98 had a 330 SW, whereas my 100 is 320 SW. This will have contributed to the effects I describe above, and I haven't tried it properly yet with a lower SW. I doubt that explains everything though, as others have confirmed this feeling after playing with it stock.

None of these are power rackets, so we are talking relatively here of course. If you want power, you buy an eZone or similar.
 
I should add that what I am looking for in a racket is what a racing car or a proper road going sports car delivers. If you push the throttle down 50%, you get 50%, and then if you back off by 1% you get 1% less power, 3% you get 3%, and so on; same with the brakes, and the steering. This is necessary to control the car at high speed, and it's also necessary for a tennis racket. If I hit a ball and it lands 6 inches beyond the baseline, I want to be able to take 8 inches off that to make it land inside, if all other things about my swing are equal; same with spin, direction etc. Obviously I lack the skill in tennis to do this like I did in my racing car, but you can tell when a racket is helping you and hindering you. To me, a lot of rackets I try feel like modern faux performance cars - they impress with easy to access spin and power, but lack control. The control is what drew me to the Blade 100. I thought the 98 16x19 would be a small step on for better control, but actually I felt it was the other way around. The experienced player in that You Tube video said the same, as did another poster above.

I hope the 18x20 proves to be what I'm looking for; if not I'd like to try a Percept.
 
Me too. I tried Blade V9 for short period of time. Power felt good, almost like my Speed Mp 2022. Definetaly more power than V8.
Im looking for a racquet with a bit less power than Speed Mp and better control. Still cant decide.
pure strike, angell, gravity
 
I should add that what I am looking for in a racket is what a racing car or a proper road going sports car delivers. If you push the throttle down 50%, you get 50%, and then if you back off by 1% you get 1% less power, 3% you get 3%, and so on; same with the brakes, and the steering. This is necessary to control the car at high speed, and it's also necessary for a tennis racket. If I hit a ball and it lands 6 inches beyond the baseline, I want to be able to take 8 inches off that to make it land inside, if all other things about my swing are equal; same with spin, direction etc. Obviously I lack the skill in tennis to do this like I did in my racing car, but you can tell when a racket is helping you and hindering you. To me, a lot of rackets I try feel like modern faux performance cars - they impress with easy to access spin and power, but lack control. The control is what drew me to the Blade 100. I thought the 98 16x19 would be a small step on for better control, but actually I felt it was the other way around. The experienced player in that You Tube video said the same, as did another poster above.

I hope the 18x20 proves to be what I'm looking for; if not I'd like to try a Percept.
What is your ntrp rating?
 
Does anyone here still use the v8? I honestly feel like the v8 blade with some weight in the handle and throat feels identical to the v9. Especially if you get the swingweight of the V8 up to the 320-330 range.
I still play the blade 98 v8 18x20 weighted up (a few grams in the head and a few in the handle) with strung SW at 330. I also have some V7 with a touch higher SW and the two are close with the V7 feeling a bit softer. I haven’t played with the V9.
 
I can't advise as I don't have the knowledge and experience in that area. I just use what the stringer and racket tech at our club recommends, which for me is a soft poly in the mains (isospeed cream), and a multi-filament (isospeed control) in the crosses. Tension I have written down as 50/52lbs, and I don't even know which is which there. I always want less power and more control though, so this probably won't be right for you, as it sounds like you're the other way around.
Definitely try some stiffer strings (full poly) in the 98 16x19. I think it will mostly solve the issue for you.

For example, I recently tried Tour Bite Soft 17 and it played great for an hour and then became a catapult. Went back to Hyper G Round 17 and the effect was gone.
 
What is your ntrp rating?
I have absolutely no idea. I'm not very good, which is why I always played with a 100, with just mild weight to suit my tastes, as recommended for someone of my standard. After two years of tennis as an adult, I thought I'd educate myself and maybe find a racket I preferred, which is when my coach suggested that I tried the two 98s, hinting that they weren't really "more advanced" than my 100, and from what I've seen so far, I think he's right. The extra weight of the 98 isn't relevant because I always weighted up my 100s anyway, the smaller sweetspots on them I don't really notice (I even measured and plotted the difference in string spacings, and it's tiny, and actually in the opposite direction to the size difference anyway....), and as we've seen from even quite high level players like that You Tuber, the 98 16x19 is actually more powerful than the 100 anyway, so finding the power isn't an issue. What we're seeing here is, I'm sure, just a preference thing.
.
There's a common myth in all sports that beginners can play with anything, but experts need the right stuff; but it's actually the other way around. Novak could beat me with a frying pan, because he's Novak. Add 10g to my racket hoop and I couldn't even get the ball in the court. I've seen this in one sport I instructed, and every other sport I've been involved with.
 
I don’t think a player with 2 years of Tennis experience needs to ”upgrade” towards a more demanding racquet like a 98sq one. 100 is plenty advanced and nowadays even some pro players are switching to it. Of course personal preference can be taken into consideration.

But they beaty of playing a sport as an adult is that you can buy as many racquets as you want. Nobody can stop you.
 
That was what I used to think, yes, because it's what we're all told, so I stuck with the 100 and never even looked at anything other than "entry level" 100s. I even avoided the Blade for my first 6 months of tennis, because despite rave reviews it was labelled as "intermediate", compared to my eZone 100, which was aimed at beginners to intermediates.

Having chatted with my coach though, and then trying some 100s and now the 98s, this all turns out to be marketing nonsense. He originally suggested the Blade when I was struggling a bit with the eZone, and he was right. It (the Blade 100) was a revelation compared to the eZone and I played so much better with it. I had originally been looking at other 100s aimed at beg/ints, and was disappointed when I tried the Gravity, so he advised the same this time - to ignore the marketing and just try the Blade 98. As we've been discussing here, the 98 16x19 is actually slightly easier to play with than the 100; weight is the same (in fact mine is lighter...), sweetspot is so similar you wouldn't notice, and the 98 is actually more powerful. So I don't understand what's "advanced" about the 98?! It's the other way around if anything.
.
On your last comment, that's a misunderstanding. I have no desire at all to own more than one racket. I'm testing rackets to find one that I like. I will then continue learning with that one racket. Thank goodness nobody's trying to "stop me" finding a racket that's easy to play and learn with.... All I want to do is to get the ball to go where I want it to and to concentrate on my technique. That's much easier with a calm and docile racket than one that fires balls all over the place.
 
Last edited:
I have absolutely no idea. I'm not very good, which is why I always played with a 100, with just mild weight to suit my tastes, as recommended for someone of my standard. After two years of tennis as an adult, I thought I'd educate myself and maybe find a racket I preferred, which is when my coach suggested that I tried the two 98s, hinting that they weren't really "more advanced" than my 100, and from what I've seen so far, I think he's right. The extra weight of the 98 isn't relevant because I always weighted up my 100s anyway, the smaller sweetspots on them I don't really notice (I even measured and plotted the difference in string spacings, and it's tiny, and actually in the opposite direction to the size difference anyway....), and as we've seen from even quite high level players like that You Tuber, the 98 16x19 is actually more powerful than the 100 anyway, so finding the power isn't an issue. What we're seeing here is, I'm sure, just a preference thing.
.
There's a common myth in all sports that beginners can play with anything, but experts need the right stuff; but it's actually the other way around. Novak could beat me with a frying pan, because he's Novak. Add 10g to my racket hoop and I couldn't even get the ball in the court. I've seen this in one sport I instructed, and every other sport I've been involved with.
Now i see why you need control. Don't want to insult you, but i was like you while being 3.0. I thought that i need control racquet, because i couldn't control my shots. But actually my technique was lacking.
Now im only 4.0 and my technique still sucks but i can control the ball with spin most of the time. If i used Speed MP while being 3.0 i would spray everything to fences lol. I played with 18 x 20 racquets from 3.5 to 4.0.

Still racquets personal and in my experience, i never won matches by outpowering opponents. Unless of course my opponent is lower level, like 3.0-3.5. I rely on placing the ball and moving opponents till i got the ball around middle court and finish it or at the net.
I want something with a little better control than Speed MP. While Speed MP with some weight added plays good for me, im still in search for a perfect racquet lol :)))
 
Yes, that’s exactly it. If you’re new to a sport and learning, you want something docile that you can control easily. Responsive in a calm way. That’s what I’m looking for. My Blade 100 allows me to experiment with spin, depth, angle etc, and it responds to that calmly without firing baljs into the sky or the back fence. The eZone and Pure Aero that I tried before were too jumpy for someone of my ability to control and were frustrating.

The Blade 98s aren’t in my experience any more “demanding” than the 100 as is sometimes suggested - they weigh the same as my 100 and the sweetspots feel similar. They just offer a different balance of power, spin and control. I suppose you could say the catapult effect on the 98 16x19 is demanding, but it’s an awful lot easier to control depth with for a relative newbie than my eZone 100 was, which is labelled as a beginner/intermediate racket. I’ve learnt to listen to coaches and racket experts who watch you play, rather than marketing people.
 
Last edited:
The trampoline effect you describe is the flex in the throat.

I bought the 100 and it reminded me of a Pure Drive but not as good. Power was similar to the 98 but without knowing where the ball was in the string bed.
 
Yes, that’s exactly it. If you’re new to a sport and learning, you want something docile that you can control easily. Responsive in a calm way. That’s what I’m looking for. My Blade 100 allows me to experiment with spin, depth, angle etc, and it responds to that calmly without firing baljs into the sky or the back fence. The eZone and Pure Aero that I tried before were too jumpy for someone of my ability to control and were frustrating.

The Blade 98s aren’t in my experience any more “demanding” than the 100 as is sometimes suggested - they weigh the same as my 100 and the sweetspots feel similar. They just offer a different balance of power, spin and control. I suppose you could say the catapult effect on the 98 16x19 is demanding, but it’s an awful lot easier to control depth with for a relative newbie than my eZone 100 was, which is labelled as a beginner/intermediate racket. I’ve learnt to listen to coaches and racket experts who watch you play, rather than marketing people.
Truth is, you’re not very good to benefit from everything the 98 has to offer. Yet! My advice is to get any racquet and forget about it. 98 or 100 makes absolutely no difference at this point, you need to focus on learning how to play and stop blaming the racquet for your shortcomings.

And to reinforce what I’m saying here’s a funny story I heard directly from Toni: when Nadal was 13 he was playing a match against some other kid at a local tournament in Mallorca and controlling the match so Toni (who had began to coach him by then) went to get something from the bar. When he came back 2-3 minutes after the other kid had broken Nadal’s serve and was winning every other point. Nadal was missing everything. Toni couldn’t believe what he was seeing but he then noticed Nadal was playing with a broken a string. He shouted for him to change his racquet and Nadal went back to making his shots and ended up winning the match. Toni’s takeaway is that it never crossed Nadal’s mind that it could be anyone/anything other than himself preventing him for making his shots.

Food for thought?
 
I think we'll have to agree to differ, but I think that's really terrible advice for anyone, and as a former coach in one sport, I feel I must say that. It also doesn't seem like advice aimed at me, because you mentioned "blaming" my racket on things, when I haven't said one bad thing about my Blade 100 - I love it. But even aside from this, I think it's bad advice for anyone.
.
Whether it's playing a musical instrument like the cello or guitar; a sport like squash, tennis or badminton; or a hobby like surfing or windsurfing (I do all of those things), I would suggest that a beginner tries a few rackets, violins, boards etc at first and finds something they're simply comfortable with and feels natural to them. That's their starting point, and I would then suggest that they stick with that and learn to the point where the learning curve flattens off and they're reasonably comfortable. For a musical instrument, this may be grade 4 to 5 for example. Typically in an activity that you do 4 or 5 times a week this will be 4 or 5 years from starting. I played tennis fairly well as a child, so restarting as an adult I feel this is now, around the two year mark. At that point for someone, I think it's a good idea to consider moving on from that beginner violin, racket, club or whatever. The method I would suggest would be to speak to your coach or teacher and ask them for a short list of two or three, not too many, and give those a go. This is what I did with tennis rackets, and it's a coach I know very well and have a lot of respect for as he's also an accomplished professional racket tech and stringer. Ideally you can play with that coach and ask for their opinion. In my time teaching one sport and learning lots of others, I can't think of a single coach who would disagree with this advice. This is exactly what I've done with tennis, just as I did with those other sports and hobbies I listed, and I'm very happy with how things are going, just as I was happy in the other areas. My coach said, and I now agree, that there's not some magical hierarchy where a 98 is unplayable and a 100 is, certainly not if they have the same swingweight. As the You Tube guy said (and I know he's a very good player) and another poster, these Blades are three very comparable rackets. What's challenging and best left to the pros is adding loads of lead or going really small (which doesn't really happen anymore - the days of 90s and 95s are pretty much gone).
.
I love my Blade 100, but it's fun and educational to be trying a few different options. I've also learnt a bit about myself and how I play tennis, which is nice. I've also learnt about other people that I play, and can now understand the shots I'm getting back at me. It's a lovely learning exercise that will be fruitful even if I decide to stick with the Blade 100.
 
Last edited:
My Blade 100 allows me to experiment with spin, depth, angle etc, and it responds to that calmly without firing baljs into the sky or the back fence. The eZone and Pure Aero that I tried before were too jumpy for someone of my ability to control and were frustrating.
Here’s where you blamed a few racquets for your shortcomings.

When, at your level, you feel you can’t control a racquet, that’s on you. Get some classes and practise more, it takes time to develop proper technique. Of course it’s very tempting to think a racquet can sort it out for you, but unfortunately that’s not true. You’ll change dozen of times and try many different things but ultimately you’ll never improve significantly. It’s a matter of mentality, is the issue the indian or the arrow?
 
You were referring to my current racket. You thought I wanted to change cause I was "blaming" that one for something. That isn't what I said. The eZone and PA were my first two, right back when I started again as an adult. Power and spin rackets like that are a very particular thing, and they’re not for me. As a beginner you need something that you’re comfortable with and can learn with, so I stand by what I say. Of course I could have learnt with them, but I’ve learnt much better with the Blade 100, cause I feel comfortable playing with it. As a beginner in my experience that’s what it’s all about - being comfortable.
 
Last edited:
So essentially you can't control the power of the 98 16? That's funny as being a control frame its not something you hear very often.

I suspect the issue is with your stroke mechanic which I'm guessing is late, probably due to your added weight. Your options are prep earlier, play stock or string at a higher tension.
 
No, that's not what I said. The coach in the video said the same thing as me. Neither of us “can’t control” it, we just find it a bit unpleasant and not to our tastes.
.
The truth is anyone can play with anything, whatever their standard, and yes, technique or weight changes can help. However, differences do exist between rackets, and I think it's very valid to 1) Choose something as a beginner that you're comfortable with, and 2) that after several years of playing with one racket, that a player tries two or three different rackets, with the guidance and supervision of a good coach who knows them well, just to open their eyes a bit and see if there's something they like now times have changed.
.
This notion from you and what_army that someone should choose anything and then battle on and learn to use it is rather strange. We all have preferences and it helps to be comfortable with something so you can forget about what you're holding and just focus on learning to play better.
 
Last edited:
However, I'm finding the 98 v9 a bit like those spin and power rackets I couldn't get on with - not as pronounced, but it has this unbelievable pop, where I feel the ball sink into the strings (it feels way softer than the 100) and then fire out again manically, without as much control as my much stiffer feeling Blade. it's almost like there's some power magic going on in there, and if you told me it was a trick racket I'd believe you. It's too much for me - I feel like I can't control the pace well enough and I'm often hitting long, but if I back off the ball falls shorter than I want.
The Blade 16 is a player's frame, so I have to agree with what_army.
 
Have you actually played with this specific racket? The 98 16x19 v9? Because others have said the same as me: that experienced coach on You Tube said exactly the same as I did, and I hadn't even seen the video when I commented. Don't you think that's too much of a coincidence? It seems to be an inherent characteristic, at least for many of us. For you to disagree with us so strongly, I would expect you to have at least tried it.
 
Last edited:
This notion from you and what_army that someone should choose anything and then battle on and learn to use it is rather strange. We all have preferences and it helps to be comfortable with something so you can forget about what you're holding and just focus on learning to play better.
Yes, because this stick-to-the-basics-no-shortcuts-and-don’t-get-bogged-down-on-equipment-early-on is how many of us started and it worked! In any case, rather than criticising the choices you’re making I’m simply trying to offer an alternative view based on my perception that you’re not yet good enough to appreciate the small intricacies of the blade 98 and use it to its full potential.
 
Yes, because this stick-to-the-basics-no-shortcuts-and-don’t-get-bogged-down-on-equipment-early-on is how many of us started and it worked! In any case, rather than criticising the choices you’re making I’m simply trying to offer an alternative view based on my perception that you’re not yet good enough to appreciate the small intricacies of the blade 98 and use it to its full potential.
It sounds like we actually agree on the first stage: find something you're comfortable with and don't change it, just learn with that one racket for a few years. Where we differ is presumably the point at which it's helpful to try two or three alternative rackets to see if things have changed since those early days. I'm saying that's when someone's levelled off a bit in the learning curve and is happy - perhaps 2 years for someone that played as a child and has got back into it, or perhaps 4 to 5 years for a beginner. If you disagree with this, that's obviously fine, but what do you think that point is? Surely you admit that this point will be reached at some stage?
 
Have you actually played with this specific racket? The 98 16x19 v9? Because others have said the same as me: that experienced coach on You Tube said exactly the same as I did, and I hadn't even seen the video when I commented. Don't you think that's too much of a coincidence? It seems to be an inherent characteristic, at least for many of us. For you to disagree with us so strongly, I would expect you to have at least tried it.
I played with the V8 16 for over two years. In fact, I still have it. Before that, I owned 3 other Blade 16x19 iterations and played with all extensively.

The Blade is one of the best frames on the market and the 16 is by far the most popular on the pro circuit. Unfortunately, you are not accomplished enough to utilise its 'inherent characteristics'.
 
Last edited:
So that’s a no then. Why do you think you can dismiss Nikola Aracic’s opinion on a racket you’ve never even touched?

Forums never change, do they?
 
It sounds like we actually agree on the first stage: find something you're comfortable with and don't change it, just learn with that one racket for a few years. Where we differ is presumably the point at which it's helpful to try two or three alternative rackets to see if things have changed since those early days. I'm saying that's when someone's levelled off a bit in the learning curve and is happy - perhaps 2 years for someone that played as a child and has got back into it, or perhaps 4 to 5 years for a beginner. If you disagree with this, that's obviously fine, but what do you think that point is? Surely you admit that this point will be reached at some stage?
Correct, I agree that changing racquets may be helpful but to a minor extent and only when your game has developed to a point where understand different playing styles and possibly have begun to develop a preference. At this point I agree that racquets will give you different things and can be helpful in enhancing certain aspects that you wish to base your game on. I don’t agree that a racquet will ever give you everything, that’s a myth and if you search for that racquet you’ll be forever searching :)
 
So that’s a no then. Why do you think you can dismiss Nikola Aracic’s opinion on a racket you’ve never even touched?

Forums never change, do they?
I'm dismissing your opinion because you contradict yourself and my current frame is a V9.

Stick to the 100s.
 
Last edited:
Why do you think you can dismiss Nikola Aracic’s opinion on a racket you’ve never even touched?
A lot of people on these forums don't like the guy in the first place ;) .
I mainly agree with @RobManser . Nothing wrong with testing out a few racquets and contemplating on the differences between them. It doesn't mean that the player isn't actively looking to improve physically/mentally/technically. I think this falls into "disclosure culture" that is rampant on the internet. Rob didn't specifically say that he will hope that buying a new racquet will make everything in his game better and magically fix his swing and floaty balls. But because he didn't disclose that people will assume it and hate him because of it. Plus it does feel like there is some hate, because he dissed a Blade racquet on a Blade thread. The usual advice on TT is to discuss things with your local coach and that's what he did. I guess the next advice is to change the coach, because he dared to suggest some equipment changes.

I have also said that what's the point of searching the racquet forum to tell people they shouldn't be paying attention to racquets and only focus on other more fundamental things? It does scream a bit of insecurity and a need to be negative towards other people.
 
When i tried Blade 16x19 V9 i had really good power, almost like Speed MP, but with better control an feel. I actually was surprised, because i played with Blade 16x19 V8 for some time till i sold it. Couldn't get used to V8, because there wasnt any plow through and felt like my balls are weak even though control was very good.
 
My few cents for Blade discussion is that I felt like I had now power at all. Both 98 and 100 :D . I'm not sure what is wrong in my swing but for Blade it doesn't produce enough power. CX 400 Tour and Percept control racquets had better power for myself. PS X also much better for my swing.
 
Rob didn't specifically say that he will hope that buying a new racquet will make everything in his game better and magically fix his swing and floaty balls.
No but he did say that the 98 is more powerful than the 100 which made me wonder whether his technique has developed enough at this point. Focusing on proper technique will give him more power than whatever improvement he thinks the 98 may be giving him.

It’s mostly this but also don’t come on a blade thread dissing the blade, it’s “Live by the blade, die by the blade” here. :)
 
No but he did say that the 98 is more powerful than the 100 which made me wonder whether his technique has developed enough at this point. Focusing on proper technique will give him more power than whatever improvement he thinks the 98 may be giving him.

It’s mostly this but also don’t come on a blade thread dissing the blade, it’s “Live by the blade, die by the blade” here. :)
It could be possible because of QC. SW, weight and stiffness can vary all over the place.
 
When i tried Blade 16x19 V9 i had really good power, almost like Speed MP, but with better control an feel. I actually was surprised, because i played with Blade 16x19 V8 for some time till i sold it. Couldn't get used to V8, because there wasnt any plow through and felt like my balls are weak even though control was very good.
Most likely a SW issue. Very common with the blade 98 16x19. The 18x20 was a little better and even there I have come across a few with SW in the low 280s (and one with 277, which is appalling to me).
 
It could be possible because of QC. SW, weight and stiffness can vary all over the place.
Based on my own measurements weight and balance are pretty good at least from V7 onwards. Stiffness will vary but extreme outliers aside, most racquets will flex within 2-3ra of each other. SW is consistently high in the V7, all over the place in the V8 and much more consistent in the V9.
 
When i tried Blade 16x19 V9 i had really good power, almost like Speed MP, but with better control an feel. I actually was surprised, because i played with Blade 16x19 V8 for some time till i sold it. Couldn't get used to V8, because there wasnt any plow through and felt like my balls are weak even though control was very good.
This makes sense, yes, and fits in with my experiences and what coaches and experienced players have said. Obviously I've chatted to a lot of good players and coaches who know me before choosing these three rackets to try, and what you're saying there is completely consistent with what I've felt and heard.
.
With the 18x20 I've now had two hours of wall/machine/serves, two hours at a club night, and one hour of coaching. I agree with the earlier poster, and Nick's video: the 98 16x19 has the pop to it, and the 100 and 98 18x20 are calmer and more controlled. They are all control biased all round rackets, so obviously this is all relative to each other. The biggest difference I'm feeling now between 100 v8 and 98 18x20 v9 is the v9's muted feel. That's a completely subjective preference thing, and if you're coming from a racket with a more raw feel, like the 100 v8, it'll take a few weeks to build up trust, which is what I'm going to do.
 
No but he did say that the 98 is more powerful than the 100 which made me wonder whether his technique has developed enough at this point. Focusing on proper technique will give him more power than whatever improvement he thinks the 98 may be giving him.

It’s mostly this but also don’t come on a blade thread dissing the blade, it’s “Live by the blade, die by the blade” here. :)
A few others have said it too, it's not just me. Bear in mind the 100 is a v8 and the 98 a v9, and also that it's matched, so weight differences aren't playing a part here. There's a catapult like pop to the 98 v9 that just isn't there in the 100 v8.
.
I don't think the 98 is giving me "improvements". I'm not looking to a racket to give me anything other than a different feeling, and as a curious minded guy I'm looking to learn a bit about the differences between them.
.
As is often the case on forums, posters get fitted into a stereotype and then that stereotype is attacked. I am not a beginner thinking the racket is more important than my technique, as you seem to think. I'm not flayling around changing this and that thinking it'll do more than coaching will. I have seen this stereotype in other sports, and it's certainly not me in anything I do. Having returned to tennis after a long break, I've been having 1-3 hours of coaching every week across two sessions, with around 4 hours of match play, also across two sessions, every week for two years, with two weeks of intensive tennis coaching and play each summer, all with the same racket, same strings, and everything. I just think that at this point it's nice to try some new things to learn something and find something I like. This arose from a conversation with my coach, who is truly excellent at what he does and knows me very well, and he suggested a list of a few rackets to try based on playing with me for that time. I think that's perfectly reasonable.
 
The 98 has more plough than the 100 and is the most powerful of the three. It's a spin-orientated frame , more than the 98 18 which favours flatter hitters. It's a superior frame to the 100 and offers much better control & touch.

What is your string setup?
I agree with this, as this was my impression as well. The 100 is a bit more forgiving, but the 98 is better all around.

Any thoughts on how the Blade PRO 98 16x19 compares to the regular? I know the specs, just curious.
 
Just my two cents after 2.5 years of tennis regarding Blades versus Speed MPs etc.

Started learning with Blade V7 16x19 switched to Speed MP 2022 with lead tape then again switched to Blade V9 16x19 with lead tape
and currently i own both a Head Speed Legend (MP2024) with lead and a Blade Pro V9 18x20 with lead.

Difference revolves around the level of power, spin and control.
Both are low flex, speed has widely more open pattern versus blade.

The default state of hitting with a Speed MP is much higher than Blade's. This means that with Speed MP u can find depth, spin and power effortlessly.
However, to find control you need to swing very fast and properly. If u are lazy because of the high launch angle and the inherent power it becomes an uncontrollable cannon.

Now, the Blade is much more controlled and relatively underpowered in its default state meaning less power, less spin and kind of lower launch angle.
Again, to find power and control with this racket u need to swing very fast and with proper technique. At this stage it is much more controlled and precise than Speed MP but it is more suited to flattening out winners rather than grinding deep, heavy, topspin induced balls.

This became much more apparent and clear with the Blade Pro V9 18x20 if u dont hit with ur whole body and use body transfer explosively then u have 0 depth, power and spin but when u actually commit to the shot oh boy it blows balls out the court. Amazing , penetration balls but in this case it requires even more hitting through the ball since its a 18x20 etc..

Simply, I would play with Speed MP to send two high, deep heavy topspin forehands on opponents backhand side and finish the point with a backhand down the line winner

and I would play with Blade to change 2-3 times directions with forehand and finish with an inside out/inside in forehand/ approach shot/volley with precision and more penetration.
 
@RobManser it was rather difficult to follow, but here’s my thoughts to your question on why to you the 98 v9 feels more powerful than the 100 v8.

Firstly, the higher SW on your 98 is definitely a significant factor, particularly because the static weight and balance of both rackets are similar. If you swung identically with both rackets, the 98 would have imparted more energy transfer to the ball, which might explain the overhitting. That said, typically if your technique was solid, swinging identically should not result in hitting long as the added velocity to the ball is typically counteracted by the additional rotation on the ball. End result being the ball should be “heavier” but still land in. If you didn’t swing identically, it may well be a timing issue because of the higher SW, resulting in hitting long due to off-centre hits or tilting of racket face etc. I’m inclined to believe you’re not swinging identically because you did mention that you lose control when hitting under more challenging situations, like match play.

Secondly, using the same tension for both rackets actually means the rackets aren’t matched for stringbed stiffness. I’m no expert, but I believe to arrive at the same stringbed stiffness, you have to factor in your racket head dimensions (size and shape) and string pattern. For the same string pattern and shape, you would actually need to lower tension in the smaller sized racket to arrive at the same stringbed stiffness. In your case, you actually effectively strung the 98 slightly tighter than the 100 by using the same reference tension. Typically, a tighter stringbed is associated with more control so it does seem contradictory that you had less control with the 98. But, a tighter stringbed also means a lower launch angle and less snap back. So if you were hitting hard and flat, it could result in balls going long.

Lastly, I wouldn’t get too hung up over why your experience wasn’t aligned to the rule of thumb of smaller head sized rackets being more controlled because that really applies to the rackets in stock form and how smaller head rackets are spec-ed (thinner beam, smaller sweet spot etc). In your case, you customised both. You seemed to be happy with the 100 and it helps you perform better than the 98, so is there really a need to continue experimenting? It almost sounds like you’re wishing to find a smaller sized racket you can perform with, just so you can stop using a “tweener” or “beginner’s” racket (imo the Blade 100 is not for beginners but intermediate level). If true, get that nonsense out of your head. There’s no shame in using a 100. In fact, take pride in your ability to tame these so called “powerful”, “imprecise” frames.
 
I checked in TWU Wilson Blade 98 v9 and 100 v9. Power seems about same, only a smidge higher in upper stringbed on 100. Whats interesting that sweet spot is bigger on 98. Maybe thats why RobManser feels like more power on 98 :)
Also 98 has 62 RA and 100 has 60 but vibration frequancy much lower on 98 135 vs 154. 100 must be stiffer and less comfortable. Can somebody confirm this?
 
I checked in TWU Wilson Blade 98 v9 and 100 v9. Power seems about same, only a smidge higher in upper stringbed on 100. Whats interesting that sweet spot is bigger on 98. Maybe thats why RobManser feels like more power on 98 :)
Also 98 has 62 RA and 100 has 60 but vibration frequancy much lower on 98 135 vs 154. 100 must be stiffer and less comfortable. Can somebody confirm this?
Yep, the 100 is stiffer and didn't offer much benefit over the 98 because of the stiffer stringbed. Anything outside the center felt harsh. The 98 felt more even. I didn't see the point of the 100 TBH.
 
I own both blade 100 v8 and blade 98 v9.
For me the 100 has more "free power" meaning that if I hit correctly the ball @50% of my power with a western grip, I will get decent depth and weight in to the ball.
To get the same ball, I have to hit harder with the 98.

Now if I really want to attack and hit the ball @80% of my power. I feel the 98 to be much rewarding and stable. The racket will provide good control and deliver the power where I want. the 100 in comparison is harder to play when you want to crush the ball.

If I want to play more spin and adopt a semi western grip, it is where the 98 become to weak. it is really hard to generate power(and spin) at the same time in comparison of the 100 that let you brush the ball but generate enough free power and depth.

At last, the best compromise of these is racquets is : ...
...
the clash 98 ! :D
 
@RobManser it was rather difficult to follow, but here’s my thoughts to your question on why to you the 98 v9 feels more powerful than the 100 v8.

Firstly, the higher SW on your 98 is definitely a significant factor, particularly because the static weight and balance of both rackets are similar. If you swung identically with both rackets, the 98 would have imparted more energy transfer to the ball, which might explain the overhitting. That said, typically if your technique was solid, swinging identically should not result in hitting long as the added velocity to the ball is typically counteracted by the additional rotation on the ball. End result being the ball should be “heavier” but still land in. If you didn’t swing identically, it may well be a timing issue because of the higher SW, resulting in hitting long due to off-centre hits or tilting of racket face etc. I’m inclined to believe you’re not swinging identically because you did mention that you lose control when hitting under more challenging situations, like match play.

Secondly, using the same tension for both rackets actually means the rackets aren’t matched for stringbed stiffness. I’m no expert, but I believe to arrive at the same stringbed stiffness, you have to factor in your racket head dimensions (size and shape) and string pattern. For the same string pattern and shape, you would actually need to lower tension in the smaller sized racket to arrive at the same stringbed stiffness. In your case, you actually effectively strung the 98 slightly tighter than the 100 by using the same reference tension. Typically, a tighter stringbed is associated with more control so it does seem contradictory that you had less control with the 98. But, a tighter stringbed also means a lower launch angle and less snap back. So if you were hitting hard and flat, it could result in balls going long.

Lastly, I wouldn’t get too hung up over why your experience wasn’t aligned to the rule of thumb of smaller head sized rackets being more controlled because that really applies to the rackets in stock form and how smaller head rackets are spec-ed (thinner beam, smaller sweet spot etc). In your case, you customised both. You seemed to be happy with the 100 and it helps you perform better than the 98, so is there really a need to continue experimenting? It almost sounds like you’re wishing to find a smaller sized racket you can perform with, just so you can stop using a “tweener” or “beginner’s” racket (imo the Blade 100 is not for beginners but intermediate level). If true, get that nonsense out of your head. There’s no shame in using a 100. In fact, take pride in your ability to tame these so called “powerful”, “imprecise” frames.
Sorry for all the posts. I only intended to post once, but there are some very argumentative people on here.

I agree entirely on your first two paras.

On your last point, the coach recommended I tried two 98s, a 100, and, wait for it, a 114! So no, I’m not desperate to go down in size. As I’ve said several times already, I’m just at the point now where I want to learn something, see what’s out there, and see if there’s anything I prefer to my Blade 100. Given I’ve only played with one racket for two years, I think that’s reasonable. Until two weeks ago I had no idea how the Blade 100 v8 compared with anything - it was all I knew other than those first two I tried when I first started up playing again.
 
Last edited:
I checked in TWU Wilson Blade 98 v9 and 100 v9. Power seems about same, only a smidge higher in upper stringbed on 100. Whats interesting that sweet spot is bigger on 98. Maybe thats why RobManser feels like more power on 98 :)
Also 98 has 62 RA and 100 has 60 but vibration frequancy much lower on 98 135 vs 154. 100 must be stiffer and less comfortable. Can somebody confirm this?
It wouldn’t surprise me, although we’ve heard some very experienced guys say the 98 has more power, and I’m surprised they didn’t say it was the sweet spot.

When the coach recommended two 98s I immediately questioned the idea based on my ability, but he said that the sweetspots will be very similar, and given we weighted up my 100, the swingweights, balance and weight are all similar. Basically he said 98 is close to 100 for any racket and it shouldn’t concern me. He said 95 would by an issue, for sure, but 98? No. To check this I got a ruler out, and a micrometer. Here’s what I found:

Blade 98 16x19 v9 figures first, 100 v8 second:

Head length: 32.5cm, 32.5cm
Head width: 24.5cm, 25.4cm
String crossing length: 23.9cm, 24.9cm
String crossing width: 18.5cm, 18.6cm

I’ve measured all the string spacings and plotted them. Mains are about 0.1mm closer on the 98, crosses about 0.2-0.3mm (the length is greater cause the first string on the 100 is an outlier). The variance on those figures is very small indeed, so I trust them.

Head areas I measured as 99.3 and 97.3.
 
Last edited:
It wouldn’t surprise me, although we’ve heard some very experienced guys say the 98 has more power, and I’m surprised they didn’t say it was the sweet spot.

When the coach recommended two 98s I immediately questioned the idea based on my ability, but he said that the sweetspots will be very similar, and given we weighted up my 100, the swingweights, balance and weight are all similar. Basically he said 98 is close to 100 for any racket and it shouldn’t concern me. He said 95 would by an issue, for sure, but 98? No. To check this I got a ruler out, and a micrometer. Here’s what I found:

Blade 98 16x19 v9 figures first, 100 v8 second:

Head length: 32.5cm, 32.5cm
Head width: 24.5cm, 25.4cm
String crossing length: 23.9cm, 24.9cm
String crossing width: 18.5cm, 18.6cm

I’ve measured all the string spacings and plotted them. Mains are about 0.1mm closer on the 98, crosses about 0.2-0.3mm (the length is greater cause the first string on the 100 is an outlier). The variance on those figures is very small indeed, so I trust them.

Head areas I measured as 99.3 and 97.3.
Coaches can be based and tell you it doesnt matter. Of course for them it doesnt matter if the racquet is 98 or 100.
Thats why i check TWU database, because people have different opinion on same racquet not only because it didn't work for them but also because of quality control.
When i tried Blade 98 V9, didn't felt like sweetspot was different compared to my Speed MP. It was hard to believe i was playing with 98 head actually. But hey, on TWU Blade 98 v9 sweetspot is about the same as Speed MP 2022. Maybe thats why.
 
Sorry for all the posts. I only intended to post once, but there are some very argumentative people on here.

I agree entirely on your first two paras.

On your last point, the coach recommended I tried two 98s, a 100, and, wait for it, a 114! So no, I’m not desperate to go down in size. As I’ve said several times already, I’m just at the point now where I want to learn something, see what’s out there, and see if there’s anything I prefer to my Blade 100. Given I’ve only played with one racket for two years, I think that’s reasonable. Until two weeks ago I had no idea how the Blade 100 v8 compared with anything - it was all I knew other than those first two I tried when I first started up playing again.
Fair enough. All who have taken an interest in racket specs has been on the journey before. My advice would be to have some goals in mind to structure the experimentation. At this exploratory stage, perhaps try and understand your racket spec preferences. And I would evaluate based on your feel rather than performance/outcomes (because you’re new to tennis and still developing your technique). Some examples would be finding out if you prefer stiff vs flexier frames, muted/dampened or raw, beam thickness or shape, where you prefer the weight to be distributed (polarised/depolarised/even, top or bottom heavy), your min/max static and SW thresholds (stability/twisting to determine min weight, RHS guide max weight).
 
Coaches can be based and tell you it doesnt matter. Of course for them it doesnt matter if the racquet is 98 or 100.
Thats why i check TWU database, because people have different opinion on same racquet not only because it didn't work for them but also because of quality control.
When i tried Blade 98 V9, didn't felt like sweetspot was different compared to my Speed MP. It was hard to believe i was playing with 98 head actually. But hey, on TWU Blade 98 v9 sweetspot is about the same as Speed MP 2022. Maybe thats why.
TWU is a great resource, but I’ve come to realise that the sweet spot size numbers are dependent on head size and SW based on the metric they use. So they should only be used to compare rackets with the same head size and similar SW. and even then, the sweat spot size isn’t always reflective of my experience. The Blade 100 v9 certainly doesn’t have a small sweet spot. I couldn’t perceive any difference with the PS X (which has one of the highest on TWU) or the Speed MP 2024. Conversely, the Phantom 100p also has one of the highest TWU sweet spots but my experience is the sweet spot is tiny and effectively you feel like you’re playing with a 95, but worst because it’s clunkier.
 
Fair enough. All who have taken an interest in racket specs has been on the journey before. My advice would be to have some goals in mind to structure the experimentation. At this exploratory stage, perhaps try and understand your racket spec preferences. And I would evaluate based on your feel rather than performance/outcomes (because you’re new to tennis and still developing your technique). Some examples would be finding out if you prefer stiff vs flexier frames, muted/dampened or raw, beam thickness or shape, where you prefer the weight to be distributed (polarised/depolarised/even, top or bottom heavy), your min/max static and SW thresholds (stability/twisting to determine min weight, RHS guide max weight).
Thank you, that’s helpful. The coach and racket expert at our club suggested I played with small amounts of blu-tack a few months after I got my Blade 100 and that was very revealing. Light is obviously manageable before the ball strike, but I’ve discovered that I like some weight in the racket to provide some inertia when you hit the ball (so my arm isn’t doing it!). I also played with balance and discovered what I liked there - I tried 2g at 12, then at 3 & 9, and then in the handle, to learn about what it did in different places. I’m a physicist by training and it all made sense. I found something I liked and stuck with that for the last two years. Completely by accident I’ve done myself a favour, as none of the rackets on my short list of ones to try are heavier as stock than my Blade 100, so I can make them all feel and play the same quite easily, and just focus on the inherent differences.

I confess, like with wine, there are some feelings I’m noticing that I can’t put words to, and the physics isn’t obvious to me. I’ll try… whilst my Blade 100 V8 feels nice and connected to the ball, it does feel a bit flat and board like compared to the 98s; something also really obvious with the Gravity MP, which felt even “flatter”, especially off centre. The 98 v9s in contrast have a pop to them, but feel very muted and a bit rubbery, like comparing ePAS to hPAS in a road car. What’s interesting is that the control seems to live independently of this - the muted 98s seem more precise, not less precise. The rawest of the lot, the Gravity, had the least control.

All very interesting, and it’s lovely to stumble into an area that offers such a lot of choice for people to find something they like. Most of us play tennis for enjoyment and satisfaction, after all.
 
Any recommendations on what tension to use for my blade v9 16x19. I am currently using Hyper G Soft at 49-50lbs. I am a 5.0 NTRP and UTR 10. Just feel like sometimes on defense I need a bit more help and would like some more pop of the racquet. Not sure if lowering tension would help, any recommendations? Thanks!
 
Back
Top