Wilson releasing Pro Staff 97S for Dimitrov (specs. included)

SpinToWin said:
Could you compare the performance of the PS 97, the RF 97 and the PS 97S respectively Peter? I am particularly interested in power, manoeuvrability, launch angle, control and access to spin. Thanks in advance and I'm looking forward to the release :)
Click to expand...

Here is a quick breakdown for you (with some notes)

Power:
  1. RF97 (by far)
  2. PS97
  3. PS97S

Manoeuvrability:
  1. PS97
  2. RF97 & PS97S - keeping in mind I've had the PS97S weighed down with first ~10g now 20g of lead in the handle.

Launch Angle:
Pretty close for me on all 3 - I'm not sure if one has any huge difference. Maybe the 97S a bit more.

Control:
  1. RF97
  2. PS97S
  3. PS97

Access to Spin:
See Lauch Angle :) -- in comparison to my previous PS90 all 3 generate more spin for me than the PS90 did.


.
 
Last edited:
PeterFig said:
Here is a quick breakdown for you (with some notes)

Power:
  1. RF97 (by far)
  2. PS97
  3. PS97S

Manoeuvrability:
  1. PS97
  2. RF97 & PS97S - keeping in mind I've had the PS97S weighed down with first ~10g now 20g of lead in the handle.

Launch Angle:
Pretty close for me on all 3 - I'm not sure if one has any huge difference. Maybe the 97S a bit more.

Control:
  1. RF97
  2. PS97S
  3. PS97

Access to Spin:
See Lauch Angle :) -- in comparison to my previous PS90 all 3 generate more spin for me than the PS90 did.


.
Click to expand...

All right, thank you very much, that is a great breakdown and of much help to me :)
 
racket king said:
LOL. Justine Henin used a racket that was even lighter.
Click to expand...

Just learned that Dimi adds ~20g on this racket. But I always wondered how people can use a relatively light racket on the SHBH, to me it's difficult to even hold on heavy strokes or big serves from opponents. Maybe it's because they, pros, have much more power, and Henin and like, R.Gasquet use extreme western grip on their SHBH. But I still believe Roger does best sometimes on the flick shot and the weight helps.
 
borgpro said:
Specs are excellent: just add a very heavy leather grip (fairway) making it 15 grams heavier and more headlight. Could be an excellent stick with only this easy modification....
Click to expand...

Definitely, maybe wilson can produce two models, the heavier one(20g+) and the light version. So that people can choose in between.
 
Except that Gasquet has a Eastern BH grip and lead under his bumper guard. Also, he plays an extended lenght racquet, which bumps the swingweight and hence, the stability.

And I don't see Wilson making a 5th ProStaff in the line honestly. They didn't tweak the Blade's balance despite being similar to this ProStaff S and a popular mod as well.
 
Wow. So the 97s will just be a slightly more spin-oriented, lighter version of the RF97. Balance is different, sure, but that's to adjust to the lower weight. This is exciting for me because the RF97 is just too heavy for me to handle, as it causes wrist tenderness after a while. The regular PS97 is a little too whippy for my liking.
 
Blitzball said:
Wow. So the 97s will just be a slightly more spin-oriented, lighter version of the RF97. Balance is different, sure, but that's to adjust to the lower weight. This is exciting for me because the RF97 is just too heavy for me to handle, as it causes wrist tenderness after a while. The regular PS97 is a little too whippy for my liking.
Click to expand...

Umm... it's significantly thinner beamed than the RF97A, that's a drastic (and wonderful) difference if you ask me.
 
You guys should really try a Prince Textreme Tour 95
been hitting with it this week with extra 3 grams x2
at 3 & 9, 2 x 2 grams 6 & 12 and 2 x Gamma long
overgrips on 4 1/4 grip for around 360grams.

In every department it cant be faulted its ridiculous
and Im very bitter now after settling on weighed up Ai98s
recently after much deliberation adding 30gsm to suit
my style, weight preferences and higher tensions as this
stick has more of that classic feel than Ai98s.

Either way after a week I can say the following
Feel and touch 10
Plough through 9
Controlled Spin 10
Serves and volleys 8-10
ball pocketing 10
Power 8 stringing it soft

I feel this racquet is easier to maneuver than the PS97
the spin and slice is amazing, especially low dipping volleys
where you can pick them off your toes into deadly drop shots
also pocketing the ball you can whip it back with into crazy
counterpunched winners with deep accuracy and also use very
sharp topspin angles when taking a little pace off the ball
even from heavily driven balls by your opponent.
Angled volleys put aways with crazy sizzle and angles must
be experienced to be believed, even the bounce is nasty.

My buddies using the PS97 notice less effort and less stress
on their wrist maybe due to the extra flex but even more feel
than the PS97 and similar plough through with lighter weight.
2 devout PS guys now sporting these beauties so quickly it
makes you wonder if Prince spied on Rogers every move and
just made this stick mortal consumer spec than Federico spec.

Soft polys recommended at lower tensions for extra power
and to compliment the flex of this frame.
I tried 3 with the following combos but there are others
eg. Red code 17 X50/54 and TB soft/TB 16 X50/52
Also tried one buddies preference for red code 17 / Rpm 16 50/55
but felt that combo only suits more overall weight.
 
Last edited:
Say Chi Sin Lo said:
Umm... it's significantly thinner beamed than the RF97A, that's a drastic (and wonderful) difference if you ask me.
Click to expand...

I usually don't like thick beams (I regularly play with a Yonex RDX 500 MP and a TFight Ltd), but on the RFA that's mitigated by the weight. Whenever i play with my RFA i don't perceive the RA value as high as it is nor i can feel any awful vibrations in my arm. The mass just takes care of it all. I can just hope the PS97S will be as comfy as the RFA (which is a tad too heavy for my amateurish tennis technique).
 
PeterFig said:
Despite a lot of similarities (head size, PWS, braided construction) there are a few key differences:

  • much narrower beam on 97S (19.5mm vs 22.5mm) = "flexier"
  • different string pattern (18x17 vs 16x19)
  • different balance. 97S is 3pt HL, 97 is 10pt HL
Click to expand...
Do you believe it is a better racquet as a result? I'm looking for a new frame and wondering if I should wait for the 97s or get the standard ps97. Thank you!
 
boltonfix said:
Do you believe it is a better racquet as a result? I'm looking for a new frame and wondering if I should wait for the 97s or get the standard ps97. Thank you!
Click to expand...

I don't think I could qualify either frame as "better" ... they are a bit different and depending on what type of game style you play and what you like from a racquet you may prefer one over the other.
 
much narrower beam on 97S (19.5mm vs 22.5mm) = "flexier"
different string pattern (18x17 vs 16x19)
different balance. 97S is 3pt HL, 97 is 10pt HL
Click to expand...


thin beam vs thick beam not always means more flex .
Sampras original PS85 was 17mm and was around 70 stiff
 
Can PeterFig post a video of him hitting. No offence intended but I'd prefer to know the level of a player when they're offering quite detailed opinions on how a frame plays.

I've seen people on this board giving really detailed accounts of the tiny differences between frames before only to later see a video of them playing which resembles a court jester galloping around flailing a racquet.
 
Bobby Jr said:
Can PeterFig post a video of him hitting. No offence intended but I'd prefer to know the level of a player when they're offering quite detailed opinions on how a frame plays.

I've seen people on this board giving really detailed accounts of the tiny differences between frames before only to later see a video of them playing which resembles a court jester galloping around flailing a racquet.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure he has in one of the RF97 threads
 
PeterFig, I liked the comparison you did with the 97S to the RF97 and PS97. I've been using the PS95S for the past year and a half, and wondered how the 97S would compare as im thinking about switching to the 97S based on reviews/demos.
 
Bobby Jr said:
Can PeterFig post a video of him hitting. No offence intended but I'd prefer to know the level of a player when they're offering quite detailed opinions on how a frame plays.

I've seen people on this board giving really detailed accounts of the tiny differences between frames before only to later see a video of them playing which resembles a court jester galloping around flailing a racquet.
Click to expand...

:lol:

This is funny. I know what you mean.
 
PeterFig said:
Here is a quick breakdown for you (with some notes)

Power:
  1. RF97 (by far)
  2. PS97
  3. PS97S

Manoeuvrability:
  1. PS97
  2. RF97 & PS97S - keeping in mind I've had the PS97S weighed down with first ~10g now 20g of lead in the handle.

Launch Angle:
Pretty close for me on all 3 - I'm not sure if one has any huge difference. Maybe the 97S a bit more.

Control:
  1. RF97
  2. PS97S
  3. PS97

Access to Spin:
See Lauch Angle :) -- in comparison to my previous PS90 all 3 generate more spin for me than the PS90 did.


.
Click to expand...

I find it really hard to believe that an 18 x 17 string pattern would provide more control than a 16 x 19. If the crosses are further apart there would be less of a hold on the ball from left to right. Therefore causing the ball to spray a bit left to right. And if there are more mains, that tells me that there would be less bending going on leading to less snapback thus less spin. The 18 x 17 string pattern just doesn't make sense to me. I don't know why anyone would choose to use it.
 
***********c said:
I find it really hard to believe that an 18 x 17 string pattern would provide more control than a 16 x 19. If the crosses are further apart there would be less of a hold on the ball from left to right. Therefore causing the ball to spray a bit left to right. And if there are more mains, that tells me that there would be less bending going on leading to less snapback thus less spin. The 18 x 17 string pattern just doesn't make sense to me. I don't know why anyone would choose to use it.
Click to expand...

Since the 18x17 is not released yet, I can only comment on the closest pattern, 18x16. First of all, the 18x16 is, ime, the most control oriented spin pattern. Comparing the 6.1 95S (18x16) to the 6.1 95 16x18, the S version provided slightly better feel, less pop and more spin. That being said, they were very different rackets, so factors like feel/pop/spin present themselves somewhat differently in the two frames.

You should def not dissmiss a racket based on string pattern. F.inst. the difference between the PS95S and the steam 99S is huge, even though they have the same string pattern. Ime, the PS95S is not really that spin oriented, whereas the 6.1 95S is. Have you tried the 18x16 pattern?
 
***********c said:
I find it really hard to believe that an 18 x 17 string pattern would provide more control than a 16 x 19. If the crosses are further apart there would be less of a hold on the ball from left to right. Therefore causing the ball to spray a bit left to right. And if there are more mains, that tells me that there would be less bending going on leading to less snapback thus less spin. The 18 x 17 string pattern just doesn't make sense to me. I don't know why anyone would choose to use it.
Click to expand...

I believe the theory is that friction from the crosses reduces the snapback of th mains. The spin effect patterns reduce the number of crosses vs. mains to enable more movement of the mains to increase spin.
 
AeroPro Staff said:
PeterFig, I liked the comparison you did with the 97S to the RF97 and PS97. I've been using the PS95S for the past year and a half, and wondered how the 97S would compare as im thinking about switching to the 97S based on reviews/demos.
Click to expand...

I did play with the PS95S a little bit in the past. To me the 97S feels more stable and has better control. The 95S did produce more spin. Having said that everyone's games is a bit different and they look for different things from their racquet. For me the benefits of the 97S outweigh the extra spin the 95S provided.

As for string durability... the tighter string pattern of the 97S should mean strings will last longer but I don't have much details I can give you from personal experience as I've been using a lot of different strings / string combinations so haven't really used the same strings at the same tension for any considerable time on both these racquets to compare.
 
Bobby Jr said:
Can PeterFig post a video of him hitting. No offence intended but I'd prefer to know the level of a player when they're offering quite detailed opinions on how a frame plays.

I've seen people on this board giving really detailed accounts of the tiny differences between frames before only to later see a video of them playing which resembles a court jester galloping around flailing a racquet.
Click to expand...

Hahaha -- well if you think of Federer, but with blonde hair then you're more or less thinking of me :) - just kidding of course! ;)

Realistically I think I'm a good solid "club" player but I don't pretend to be on the verge of being a 6.0 player either. Somewhere between Suresh and TonLars? :) I think there is a 6 second video of me somewhere hitting 2 forehands - which basically is useless to show my level of play. I was thinking of recording some hitting for my own interest/analysis so if I do I'm more than happy to post it on here for fun (I'm sure it would be torn apart by everyone but that's cool).
 
Peter do you know when the racket officially will be advertised? Or do you already have pics etc? And when does it go for sale? Can I drop you an email by the way?
 
borgpro said:
Peter do you know when the racket officially will be advertised? Or do you already have pics etc? And when does it go for sale? Can I drop you an email by the way?
Click to expand...

Hi

September is when the racquet is being released for sale but I don't know the details of exact release schedule, regional rollouts, advertising etc.
Yes please feel free to send me email via forum.

Peter
 
PeterFig said:
Realistically I think I'm a good solid "club" player but I don't pretend to be on the verge of being a 6.0 player either. Somewhere between Suresh and TonLars? :)
Click to expand...

I would hope our community would be supportive, on the whole I think we are.

But I agree with the previous poster, a review only makes sense with the context of the reviewers level of play. You mention Suresh, I had read some of his reviews a while back, and then saw a video of him playing. Then I realised all his reviews were meaningless, no offence against the guy, but he is simply not qualified to comment on something like 'spin', or 'power' when his technique is 3.0 bunting of the ball. There is simply no topspin technique.

A 3.0/3.5 cannot review a racket.

Personally I'm quite skeptical of reviews in general because very subtle differences in technique translate to radically different experiences of spin, power, etc.

People talk about spin a lot, but I find I can generate spin with anything if I'm hitting it right. I visited family and they only had real old junk rackets, so I played with an aluminium piece of trash, the kind that doesn't even join at the pallet, a cheap kids racket basically. It had old loose nylon, but I was getting insane spin form the thing! It was very fun.
 
jiddy-p said:
I would hope our community would be supportive, on the whole I think we are.

But I agree with the previous poster, a review only makes sense with the context of the reviewers level of play. You mention Suresh, I had read some of his reviews a while back, and then saw a video of him playing. Then I realised all his reviews were meaningless, no offence against the guy, but he is simply not qualified to comment on something like 'spin', or 'power' when his technique is 3.0 bunting of the ball. There is simply no topspin technique.

A 3.0/3.5 cannot review a racket.

Personally I'm quite skeptical of reviews in general because very subtle differences in technique translate to radically different experiences of spin, power, etc.

People talk about spin a lot, but I find I can generate spin with anything if I'm hitting it right. I visited family and they only had real old junk rackets, so I played with an aluminium piece of trash, the kind that doesn't even join at the pallet, a cheap kids racket basically. It had old loose nylon, but I was getting insane spin form the thing! It was very fun.
Click to expand...

That's why the "Tennis Tip/Trick" section is all BS. All these idiots talking about "launch angles" and breaking down particular strokes with some random mathematical theorem is just stupid.

All these idiots are giving tips on techniques and whatnot, post a video instead. (But then they go silent when asked for a video, hahaha)
 
PeterFig said:
Here is a quick breakdown for you (with some notes)

Power:
  1. RF97 (by far)
  2. PS97
  3. PS97S

Manoeuvrability:
  1. PS97
  2. RF97 & PS97S - keeping in mind I've had the PS97S weighed down with first ~10g now 20g of lead in the handle.

Launch Angle:
Pretty close for me on all 3 - I'm not sure if one has any huge difference. Maybe the 97S a bit more.

Control:
  1. RF97
  2. PS97S
  3. PS97

Access to Spin:
See Lauch Angle :) -- in comparison to my previous PS90 all 3 generate more spin for me than the PS90 did.


.
Click to expand...

Hi Peter. With 20g in the handle, where does it take the balance point in your strung 97S sample? Thanks in advance.
 
jiddy-p said:
But I agree with the previous poster, a review only makes sense with the context of the reviewers level of play. You mention Suresh, I had read some of his reviews a while back, and then saw a video of him playing. Then I realised all his reviews were meaningless, no offence against the guy, but he is simply not qualified to comment on something like 'spin', or 'power' when his technique is 3.0 bunting of the ball. There is simply no topspin technique.

A 3.0/3.5 cannot review a racket.

Personally I'm quite skeptical of reviews in general because very subtle differences in technique translate to radically different experiences of spin, power, etc.
Click to expand...

A 3.0 can review a racket from a 3.0 perspective. Imo reviews are most useful when they are personal/subjective, as long as we have a good understanding/acknowledgement of the the rewiever.

This is why I think TW reviews work rather well, since it is easier to project your personal preferences onto several playtesters rather than just one. In addition, they match playtesters and the rackets target audience.

When I offer my advice on equipment and/or playing, I make it a point to describe my level as accurately as possible, as well as considering if my view offers anything relevant to the discussion :-)

That being said, when PeterFig is the only one who's tried the PS97S and who's posted about it (afaik), AND we are craving more info on this frame, maybe we could hold back on the criticism until there are more posters on that have tried it? ;-)
 
veecee said:
Hi Peter. With 20g in the handle, where does it take the balance point in your strung 97S sample? Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...


I was wondering the same thing. I think the answer is it depends. 20 grams spread along the entire handle will probably make the frame 4-6 points more HL, whereas 20 grams concentrated 1" from the bottom of the handle will have a greater impact on the balance and presumably make the frame play softer.
 
smalahove said:
A 3.0 can review a racket from a 3.0 perspective. Imo reviews are most useful when they are personal/subjective, as long as we have a good understanding/acknowledgement of the the rewiever.

This is why I think TW reviews work rather well, since it is easier to project your personal preferences onto several playtesters rather than just one. In addition, they match playtesters and the rackets target audience.

When I offer my advice on equipment and/or playing, I make it a point to describe my level as accurately as possible, as well as considering if my view offers anything relevant to the discussion :-)

That being said, when PeterFig is the only one who's tried the PS97S and who's posted about it (afaik), AND we are craving more info on this frame, maybe we could hold back on the criticism until there are more posters on that have tried it? ;-)
Click to expand...

A 3.0 review is an irrelevant review.
 
Say Chi Sin Lo said:
A 3.0 review is an irrelevant review.
Click to expand...

Did you take the time to read what I actually posted?

Of course a 3.0 review is irrelevant - to you (assuming you have a higher rating).

Just as a 6.0 review is irrelevant to a 3.0 player.

Just as Stan's racket specs are irrelevant to almost every TT poster.

Speaking of Stan, let me paraphrase Beckett:

Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Read again. Read better.
 
philbhp said:
I was wondering the same thing. I think the answer is it depends. 20 grams spread along the entire handle will probably make the frame 4-6 points more HL, whereas 20 grams concentrated 1" from the bottom of the handle will have a greater impact on the balance and presumably make the frame play softer.
Click to expand...

I didn't measure unstrung (and no overgrip) ... but with it strung and a Wilson Pro Overgrip and adding ~20g to the handle (lead+silicon in handle) it changed the balance about 5-6 points. These are approx numbers as I was somewhat "casual" when adding weight and measuring. :)
 
smalahove said:
Did you take the time to read what I actually posted?

Of course a 3.0 review is irrelevant - to you (assuming you have a higher rating).

Just as a 6.0 review is irrelevant to a 3.0 player.

Just as Stan's racket specs are irrelevant to almost every TT poster.

Speaking of Stan, let me paraphrase Beckett:

Ever tried. Ever failed. No matter. Try Again. Read again. Read better.
Click to expand...

I did, and I think if someone is reviewing an item and doesn't have a clue to begin with will be irrelevant regardless of who's reading the review.

I can talk about Germany all day long even though I've never been there, would someone who's never been to Germany find my thoughts useful? No.
 
Say Chi Sin Lo said:
I did, and I think if someone is reviewing an item and doesn't have a clue to begin with will be irrelevant regardless of who's reading the review.

I can talk about Germany all day long even though I've never been there, would someone who's never been to Germany find my thoughts useful? No.
Click to expand...

haha funny but true... i have learnt to take every review with a pinch of salt. Then over time after reading a lot of reviews you can figure out some common points that everyone mentions. And also over time you can tell which posters seem to know what they are about and others....ummmm not so much lol :).
 
PeterFig said:
I didn't measure unstrung (and no overgrip) ... but with it strung and a Wilson Pro Overgrip and adding ~20g to the handle (lead+silicon in handle) it changed the balance about 5-6 points. These are approx numbers as I was somewhat "casual" when adding weight and measuring. :)
Click to expand...

Peterfig would you mind dropping me an email? a sent you a message with my email address in your profile..
and, how do you put silicone in the handle, and how much, and how doe you know if it stays there behind the budcap and doesn't start travelling through the frame? And how much lead did you add exactly, and where to put it under the grip? Doesn't adding a leather grip achieve the same result?

sorry for so many questions but I anticipate on customising one and I am not good at that at all..

please drop me an email I would appreciate that! I think we both live in Europe btw
 
borgpro said:
Peterfig would you mind dropping me an email? a sent you a message with my email address in your profile..
and, how do you put silicone in the handle, and how much, and how doe you know if it stays there behind the budcap and doesn't start travelling through the frame? And how much lead did you add exactly, and where to put it under the grip? Doesn't adding a leather grip achieve the same result?

sorry for so many questions but I anticipate on customising one and I am not good at that at all..

please drop me an email I would appreciate that! I think we both live in Europe btw
Click to expand...

Hi
I sent you a message on how I customized the frames. Lots of thanks though to Geoff for his help there.
I actually live in Canada, but was born in Europe.
Peter
 
Does this racquet have a handle that is mean't for a one hander or two? I know a few of the older 90s had short handles that made it a little awkward on a two handed backhand because the top hand would be slightly off the grip
 
Rafa4Ever said:
Does this racquet have a handle that is mean't for a one hander or two? I know a few of the older 90s had short handles that made it a little awkward on a two handed backhand because the top hand would be slightly off the grip
Click to expand...

I actually find the handle on the 90s to be particularly good for two handers, since you could wrap the overgrip beyond the handle and make the racquet have a handle length reminiscent of an extended racquet
 
sixone90 said:
Previous thread got deleted because of the downgrade back to the old forum.

Head Size: 97"
Unstrung Weight: 310g
Unstrung Balance: 335mm (no that is not a typo!)
String Pattern: 18x17
Beam Width: 19.5mm Flat Beam
Click to expand...

Going to be tricky to correct that balance without adding a ton of weight. That said, it wouldn't unheard of to find one with say a 328-330mm balance and work from there. Either that or it's a case of going down a grip size, adding a grip enlarger and leather (though not sure how that's going to affect the feel through the handle).
 
PeterFig said:
Here is a quick breakdown for you (with some notes)

Power:
  1. RF97 (by far)
  2. PS97
  3. PS97S

Manoeuvrability:
  1. PS97
  2. RF97 & PS97S - keeping in mind I've had the PS97S weighed down with first ~10g now 20g of lead in the handle.

Launch Angle:
Pretty close for me on all 3 - I'm not sure if one has any huge difference. Maybe the 97S a bit more.

Control:
  1. RF97
  2. PS97S
  3. PS97

Access to Spin:
See Lauch Angle :) -- in comparison to my previous PS90 all 3 generate more spin for me than the PS90 did.


.
Click to expand...

Hi Peter

Which is the most comfortable/arm friendly in your opinion of the 3 frames?

Thanks
 
he shoud have stayed with his old racquet. he was near the top guys - now he is far away and it will cost him a lot of time to close the gap.
 
hirschi80 said:
he shoud have stayed with his old racquet. he was near the top guys - now he is far away and it will cost him a lot of time to close the gap.
Click to expand...
I'm with you - spent the offseason before 2014 toying with setup - won a bunch of tournaments and made the Wimbledon SF in 2014. Should have looked somewhere else to improve. Changing racquets like he's some TW board member - crazy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

L
Dimitrov new racquet?
3 4 5
Replies
202
Views
46K
jmacdaununder2
jmacdaununder2
shaneno
Grgior Dimitrov thread information gear
Replies
13
Views
5K
SpinToWin
SpinToWin
gplracer
Is Wilson Discontinuing the Pro Staff 97?
Replies
17
Views
4K
srvnvly
srvnvly
gplracer
Is Wilson Discontinuing the Pro Staff 97?
Replies
1
Views
649
Seth
Seth
M
What is the closest racket to the Wilson Pro Staff 97S
Replies
11
Views
1K
Mark Schuering
M
Back
Top