Wilson KBlade Tour playtest (by request)

I prefer to think of it as lowering tension to increase depth.

J

Exactly. I'm not sure why ppl continue to claim that lower tension does not give more power. Lowering tension in fact gives me more dwell time, which gives me a thicker contact = more depth. Those are factors that probably aren't measured or are over-looked.
 
I agree wholeheartedly with the last two posters. Now if local tennis shops and stringers would just explain it that way to their customers...
 
Exactly. I'm not sure why ppl continue to claim that lower tension does not give more power.

Cause it really doesn't, or at least not in the manner people think it does. ie, dropping tenion will result in 10 mph more on serve.

In fact, some reports have concluded it decreases power.
 
I always thought that lower tensions give you more spin.. is this correct? :confused:

No, practice gives you more spin.

Lower tension may require you to hit more spin in order to keep the ball in the court, but if you as a person are not capable of applying said spin, your ball will simply go long.

J
 
Played with K90 and Bab PCT. Hard to compare them, as they are all very different. In short, KBT compared to:
K90: not much to compare. K90 is not a very forgiving racquet. Your game needs to be on to use that stick, IMO. It is a player's stick, and should be used by those who can consistently hit in the sweetspot.


just wanted to say I completely disagree with this - I'm about a 4.5 level player and I think that k90 actually is VERY forgivable on off center shots compared to other mids. It's weight and stiffness really give a lot of pop to the ball, when just blocking it, so as far as pace generation goes, just getting the racket on the ball is often all thats needed to keep the ball in play.

What k90 will not forgive is out-of-form-wild-swing-outs - keep your feet on the ground, move deliberately, prepare early and you'll find plenty of forgiveness.
 
Exactly. I'm not sure why ppl continue to claim that lower tension does not give more power. Lowering tension in fact gives me more dwell time, which gives me a thicker contact = more depth. Those are factors that probably aren't measured or are over-looked.

Because scientific grade testing has shown it to be so.

Lowering tension IN FACT does not give you "more dwell time", especially not anything you can POSSIBLY perceive (.0004-.0005 seconds) and more depth is a product of higher rebound angle lose strings give, not faster ball speed.
 
Because scientific grade testing has shown it to be so.

Lowering tension IN FACT does not give you "more dwell time", especially not anything you can POSSIBLY perceive (.0004-.0005 seconds) and more depth is a product of higher rebound angle lose strings give, not faster ball speed.

You in FACT know nothing about tennis. Don't quote my posts, and do not even talk/reply to my posts. K, thanks.
 
Cause it really doesn't, or at least not in the manner people think it does. ie, dropping tenion will result in 10 mph more on serve.

In fact, some reports have concluded it decreases power.
Whatever floats your boat. One opinion isn't going to change a thing. Good luck with that.
 
Cam... how do you think this racket would perform as a serve and volleyer (ie. Solid flat first, Reverse kick second?)

Is it an all round stick in your opinon?

Thanks, Josh :)
 
Whatever floats your boat. One opinion isn't going to change a thing. Good luck with that.

AC, what I stated is not "my opinion", is is fact based on several studies. Lowering tension does not provide more mph in the manner people think, and in some studies has actually shown the ball speed to decrease.
 
You in FACT know nothing about tennis. Don't quote my posts, and do not even talk/reply to my posts. K, thanks.

Well I figured you'd have nothing more convincing to respond with...

P.S. I'll quote and respond as I please - free country after all.
 
Last edited:
Cam... how do you think this racket would perform as a serve and volleyer (ie. Solid flat first, Reverse kick second?)
Is it an all round stick in your opinon?
Thanks, Josh :)
Hmmm. . . . good question. I would think it would be, yes. The nice thing that this racquet has going for it is that I think it would respond very well to some tuning, i.e. lead here and there, etc. It is quite a nice stick. As for spin, it can generate plenty. Much more so than I was expecting from an 18x20 bed. And keep in mind that the strings were the crappy TW stock demo strings. Throw in some ALU Rough and a nice complementing string in the cross or mains (user preference), and you could have a wicked stick. It's weight is ideal, to me. If I can't find what I'm looking for elsewhere, I'm either going with this or it's big brother, the 98. 98 is supposed to be a different animal altogether, so that will be my next demo.
 
just wanted to say I completely disagree with this - I'm about a 4.5 level player and I think that k90 actually is VERY forgivable on off center shots compared to other mids. It's weight and stiffness really give a lot of pop to the ball, when just blocking it, so as far as pace generation goes, just getting the racket on the ball is often all thats needed to keep the ball in play. What k90 will not forgive is out-of-form-wild-swing-outs - keep your feet on the ground, move deliberately, prepare early and you'll find plenty of forgiveness.
Ok. To each his own. I appreciate your opinion.

Keep in mind that the K90 I got from TW had about the crappiest pair of strings I have ever gotten from them: black spots, and lifeless. Felt like I was swinging a piece of road kill.

I know all about what that K90 should do, so I was shocked. No previous small ProStaff that I've played with (and I've played with them all) has ever felt like the K90. Felt awful. It should have felt stiff, strong, and had a great powerband. But it felt very flexible with little power. Again, this is due to the strings. I'm telling you guys: strings make or break a demo. Period.

I am going to re-demo the K90 at a local tennis shop, as I just can't get consistent stringjobs from TW. No offense to TW, and TW and I have communicated on this. They just have too much going on with their demos, and the cost to re-string (when they should) would nullify the demo program. As it is, they're probably barely breaking even on the program.

I don't know if you were saying that I swing wildly, but I don't. I've been playing too long to hit like that.
 
Well I figured you'd have nothing more convincing to respond with...
P.S. I'll quote and respond as I please - free country after all.
You guys are pretty funny with the back-and-forth comments. :) AC did seem to get a bit too upset there, though.
 
You guys are pretty funny with the back-and-forth comments. :) AC did seem to get a bit too upset there, though.

Did the study consider how a player strokes the ball, and whether or not they hit with different grips? I'm sure flat hitters get more depth with a low strung racket, and that in itself already contradicts anton's statements. As for my original statement, when I string lower I have more dwell time/a thicker contact, which gives me more power/depth. Lower tension DOES give me a slight bump in "power", and it is very noticeable to me.

Am I the only one who's tired of Anton spewing this trash around in every single thread, as though it's actually 100% true? FYI he read a book and is regurgitating what he can remember. If he wants to be fair/honest, he should quote the book, instead of interpreting it himself and then giving us a breakdown in his personal words, because the book says a lower tension DOES give you a slight bump in power.
 
Last edited:
Did the study consider how a player strokes the ball, and whether or not they hit with different grips? I'm sure flat hitters get more depth with a low strung racket, and that in itself already contradicts anton's statements. As for my original statement, when I string lower I have more dwell time/a thicker contact, which gives me more power/depth. Lower tension DOES give me a slight power bump, and it is very noticeable. Am I the only one who's tired of Anton spewing this trash around in every single thread, as though it's actually 100% true? FYI he read a book and is regurgitating what he can remember. If he wants to be fair/honest, he should quote the book, instead of interpreting it himself and then giving us a breakdown in his personal words, because the book says a lower tension DOES give you a slight bump in power.
In your defense, I'm sure that the study did not consider all of the variables.

As to you not liking what Anton says, why don't you just ignore it? I know I've had run-ins with people on here, but only when they've attacked me personally. If Anton's attacked you personally (which it doesn't sound like he has), then do what I do: ignore it. Some people on this board (0.1%) you just can't please. They will blame you for the fact that someone pissed in their bowl of Cheerios called life. You just can't please them. But if you just don't like what someone has said, then it's best to ignore it. Again, I think it's just that Anton and you disagree on this one subject. You know what you know, so why let someone else get you to think differently? Again, no offense, but if I believed everything I read on this board:
1. I should not ever bother buying a new racquet at retail, as none of the pros use them, so why should I.
2. I should be hitting every single one of my strokes differently
3. my mental approach to the game sucks (wait a minute. . . it does! They've got me on that one. :mrgreen: )
4. I have no right to like the players that I like
5. I should quit tennis after I lose a match, based on the fact that every good pro should 'retire' after they lose
The list goes on and on.

Get what I'm saying? You know tennis, and you know what you believe in. Put it this way: how many times have you heard a pro giving a lesson, or overhead someone at a tennis club giving advice that was so completely ludicrous that you actually had to stifle laughter? Exactly. Just ignore Anton's comments if they bother you.

And just as you might laugh at Anton, he laughs at you. Welcome to web boarding. We all should be learning from this board, no matter our level. That's why I still come here, as I still learn a lot from this board. And I learn from all skill levels, too, which makes it even more neat. Blew my theory (better players know more) right out the window. The more I learn, the better I become.

Anton, I am not trying to start sh** with you, so don't even think that. :mrgreen: I'm just trying to be the Rodney King of the board: "Can't we all just get along?" LOL. . . usually I end up being the Rodney Dangerfield, though: "Boy, I tell ya. . . I don't get NO respect!" :mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
nono i wasn't talking about you specifically.
I was only kidding. I hope the day never comes when I don't laugh at myself for taking a chromosome-deprived swing at the ball. Happened 2 or 3 times this morning. We all swing badly from time to time. If we didn't swing badly, we damn sure wouldn't be posting on here. . . .we'd be on tour! :)
 
Did the study consider how a player strokes the ball, and whether or not they hit with different grips? I'm sure flat hitters get more depth with a low strung racket, and that in itself already contradicts anton's statements. As for my original statement, when I string lower I have more dwell time/a thicker contact, which gives me more power/depth. Lower tension DOES give me a slight bump in "power", and it is very noticeable to me.

Am I the only one who's tired of Anton spewing this trash around in every single thread, as though it's actually 100% true? FYI he read a book and is regurgitating what he can remember. If he wants to be fair/honest, he should quote the book, instead of interpreting it himself and then giving us a breakdown in his personal words, because the book says a lower tension DOES give you a slight bump in power.

TECHNICAL TENNIS

p75:

"If you drop string tension by 10 pounds the percentage gain in ball velocity will be less then two percent, or about 1.2mph on a 60pmh stroke. That is certainly not significant enough that you can see the difference...it can add several inches to the depth of the shot.

p77:

Loose strings cause the ball to rebound closer to the perpendicular to the string face. When you add the speed and the direction of the racket to that rebound, the end result is a higher launch angle to the court, and thus the ball will travel longer.

THE PHYSICS AND TECHNOLOGY OF TENNIS:

p281 Diagram:

Distance of 70mph initial velocity ball with 960 rpm (forward) and 10 degrees initial rise (angle relative to the ground) = ~77 feet

Distance of 70mph initial velocity ball with 960 rpm (forward) and 6 degrees initial rise (angle relative to the ground) = ~58 feet


Conclusion from the diagram:

The rebound difference of just 4 degrees can make almost 20 feet of difference in how far the ball lands.


Overall conclusion: Looser strings do not make significant difference in "power", they produce a difference in rebound angle which significantly affects the distance your shot will travel.


Log your complaints about my post in the "I'm-too-tired-of-explaining-this-to-your-stubborn-a**-to-give-a-sht" box.
 
Last edited:
I was only kidding. I hope the day never comes when I don't laugh at myself for taking a chromosome-deprived swing at the ball. Happened 2 or 3 times this morning. We all swing badly from time to time. If we didn't swing badly, we damn sure wouldn't be posting on here. . . .we'd be on tour! :)

Well what I was saying some lighter rackets are more forgiving on off balance wild shots while k90 is more forgiving because you don't have to swing as fast.
 
I know all about what that K90 should do, so I was shocked. No previous small ProStaff that I've played with (and I've played with them all) has ever felt like the K90. Felt awful. It should have felt stiff, strong, and had a great powerband. But it felt very flexible with little power.

It feels flexy, but it packs a wallop. But only for certain people with certain strokes. Some people will have more hurt on their ball with a pure drive, and some with a K90.

That is why it is so important to demo.

And another thing to add to your demo. (Not you CAM, you in general terms.)

Have a friend hitting against you tell you which frame you hit the better quality ball with. You may feel that you are hitting the cover off the ball with a frame, only to find that on your opponent's end you are serving up marshmellows. And the reverse is also true sometimes, you won't feel as if you are doing much, and you will be generating a wicked ball.

J
 
CAM178, I completely agree with your "better players know more" theory being blown right out the window. I truly believe that a 2.5 player can offer just as much to this website as a 5.0 player. We all have different experiences, and what works for some doesn't work for others. I've learned so much on this website, but never so much that I feel that I'm done learning, or that a weaker player has less to offer.
 
CAM178, I completely agree with your "better players know more" theory being blown right out the window. I truly believe that a 2.5 player can offer just as much to this website as a 5.0 player. We all have different experiences, and what works for some doesn't work for others. I've learned so much on this website, but never so much that I feel that I'm done learning, or that a weaker player has less to offer.
Yeah, it's been really cool. I've learned how to compensate for deficiencies, things to do with equipment, etc. And like I said: I hope I never stop learning. That applies to everything for me, though. The day I don't want to learn is the day I get put in the ground.
 
It feels flexy, but it packs a wallop.
J
Okay, so it wasn't just me. The K90 really is flexy? I just remember the Ultra II and the original PS being so stiff that I expected the K90 to play the same way. Plus the SI is pretty damn high on that stick, so I was shocked as it felt more like a 59-61 to me. Really flexible, and more mid-throat flex to me. I just think that the demo was worn, and the string sucked. Something tells me I need to give that racquet a shot. But, as I just bought another racquet (just came in today!), I want to see if it is the right one first.
 
Okay, so it wasn't just me. The K90 really is flexy? I just remember the Ultra II and the original PS being so stiff that I expected the K90 to play the same way. Plus the SI is pretty damn high on that stick, so I was shocked as it felt more like a 59-61 to me. Really flexible, and more mid-throat flex to me. I just think that the demo was worn, and the string sucked. Something tells me I need to give that racquet a shot. But, as I just bought another racquet (just came in today!), I want to see if it is the right one first.

It feels flexy to the hand, but it packs a wallop like a stiff frame.

I would bet that it really is quite stiff on the RDC, but for some reason unlike the Ncode, you can really feel it bend.

J
 
Did the study consider how a player strokes the ball, and whether or not they hit with different grips? I'm sure flat hitters get more depth with a low strung racket, and that in itself already contradicts anton's statements. As for my original statement, when I string lower I have more dwell time/a thicker contact, which gives me more power/depth. Lower tension DOES give me a slight bump in "power", and it is very noticeable to me.

Am I the only one who's tired of Anton spewing this trash around in every single thread, as though it's actually 100% true? FYI he read a book and is regurgitating what he can remember. If he wants to be fair/honest, he should quote the book, instead of interpreting it himself and then giving us a breakdown in his personal words, because the book says a lower tension DOES give you a slight bump in power.

AC, the term is plagiarism...

to most people, the lower tension is just the feeling of a softer string bed, NOT the ability to feel dwell time. That would make you a very special person. Can't argue with someone that does not believe is science, theory, education and research.
 
Hmmm. . . . good question. I would think it would be, yes. The nice thing that this racquet has going for it is that I think it would respond very well to some tuning, i.e. lead here and there, etc. It is quite a nice stick. As for spin, it can generate plenty. Much more so than I was expecting from an 18x20 bed. And keep in mind that the strings were the crappy TW stock demo strings. Throw in some ALU Rough and a nice complementing string in the cross or mains (user preference), and you could have a wicked stick. It's weight is ideal, to me. If I can't find what I'm looking for elsewhere, I'm either going with this or it's big brother, the 98. 98 is supposed to be a different animal altogether, so that will be my next demo.


Haha thats great! That's exactly what i was hoping to hear!

I'm demoing it tomorrow (tried to demo it a while back but it started pouring with rain! :( )

Hopefully it suits me well! :)
 
When has not having to swing fast ever stopped us from swinging fast?!?!

Come on! We are men!

J

AH but I didn't say "not have to swing fast" I said "not have to swing AS fast"

I played a set with K98 yesterday and I was hitting balls short at first because I was at first swinging it more controlled like a k90 and it just wasn't fast enough. I probably increased my swing speed by about 30% before I started raining winners - it was more in the arm swing then weight transfer.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top