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

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
I honestly am looking forward to this racquet. It ticks a lot of boxes for me :)

I just hope it delivers, because I can seriously see myself switching to this.
 
Here are a few photos of Grigor Dimitrov's rackets taken recently:

GrigorDimitrovRacket15.jpg


GrigorDimitrovRacket16.jpg


GrigorDimitrovRacket17.jpg


Hope these can be of help,

ProStringing
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
@ProStringing Thanks mate! Is it just me or does the beam seem more boxy than the newer Pro Staffs? It certainly is not a purebred box beam racquet, but from your pictures it seems to be fairly close, particularly in the throat… Any truth to that?
 

ThirdEye

Semi-Pro
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.

I doubt the problem is the frame.
 
Here are a few photos of Grigor Dimitrov's rackets taken recently:

GrigorDimitrovRacket15.jpg


GrigorDimitrovRacket16.jpg


Hope these can be of help,

ProStringing

@ProStringing Thanks mate! Is it just me or does the beam seem more boxy than the newer Pro Staffs? It certainly is not a purebred box beam racquet, but from your pictures it seems to be fairly close, particularly in the throat… Any truth to that?

BOX BEAM IS BACK! :)

I think this is a narrower box beam design compared to traditional Pro Staffs, but I'm seeing relatively sharp 90degree corners.

Also, holy PWS! :eek: It's covering 5 crosses, and these are even more spread out crosses due to Wilson's "Spin" design.
 

PeterFig

Professional
I think some of that is a combination of lighting and also the blacked out paint. In "real life" it's more like the RF97 but maybe slightly more squared off edges. The thinner beam makes it seem more boxy certainly. And yes the PWS is long :)
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
BOX BEAM IS BACK! :)

I think this is a narrower box beam design compared to traditional Pro Staffs, but I'm seeing relatively sharp 90degree corners.

Also, holy PWS! :eek: It's covering 5 crosses, and these are even more spread out crosses due to Wilson's "Spin" design.
The anticipation is killing me…. This frame is so promising
 

PeterFig

Professional
It's a very nice frame to play with. I probably play with it 60-70% of the time now and the RF97 the rest. Just playing around a bit with strings / tensions but pretty happy with Gut / Luxilon Bronze combo around 55/52lb range.
 
I think some of that is a combination of lighting and also the blacked out paint. In "real life" it's more like the RF97 but maybe slightly more squared off edges. The thinner beam makes it seem more boxy certainly. And yes the PWS is long :)

I was going to say that too. Because near the throat, it clearly has sharp edges, but near the hoop, not so much. But I do wonder about the extensive PWS and the reasoning behind that.

The anticipation is killing me…. This frame is so promising

I would have prefer it be heavier, 12oz/340g unstrung (just like a traditional Pro Staff). In my experience, leading a racquet up to 12oz doesn't mean it'll necessarily play like a 12oz racquet. :(
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
BOX BEAM IS BACK! :)

I think this is a narrower box beam design compared to traditional Pro Staffs, but I'm seeing relatively sharp 90degree corners.

Also, holy PWS! :eek: It's covering 5 crosses, and these are even more spread out crosses due to Wilson's "Spin" design.

I forgot to ask, are you still using the 90 or have you gone back to the 85? I personally will probably sell the 90s soon, I just don't see the advantage between the 85 and the 95 personally.

I think some of that is a combination of lighting and also the blacked out paint. In "real life" it's more like the RF97 but maybe slightly more squared off edges. The thinner beam makes it seem more boxy certainly. And yes the PWS is long :)

It's a very nice frame to play with. I probably play with it 60-70% of the time now and the RF97 the rest. Just playing around a bit with strings / tensions but pretty happy with Gut / Luxilon Bronze combo around 55/52lb range.

I just hope this delivers… Can't say it enough :)
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
I was going to say that too. Because near the throat, it clearly has sharp edges, but near the hoop, not so much. But I do wonder about the extensive PWS and the reasoning behind that.



I would have prefer it be heavier, 12oz/340g unstrung (just like a traditional Pro Staff). In my experience, leading a racquet up to 12oz doesn't mean it'll necessarily play like a 12oz racquet. :(
I would actually say that this won't be a problem in this case, as the racquet mainly needs weight in the handle. You can achieve this by using silicone and adding a leather grip and then you already have a 12 oz racquet with a very solid feel (both leather grips and silicone add that IME).
 

PeterFig

Professional
I would actually say that this won't be a problem in this case, as the racquet mainly needs weight in the handle. You can achieve this by using silicone and adding a leather grip and then you already have a 12 oz racquet with a very solid feel (both leather grips and silicone add that IME).

Yup - that's what I've done - ~20g of lead in handle (w/silicone) + a leather grip
 
I forgot to ask, are you still using the 90 or have you gone back to the 85? I personally will probably sell the 90s soon, I just don't see the advantage between the 85 and the 95 personally.

I just hope this delivers… Can't say it enough :)

I'm still using the 2014 PS 90.

I would actually say that this won't be a problem in this case, as the racquet mainly needs weight in the handle. You can achieve this by using silicone and adding a leather grip and then you already have a 12 oz racquet with a very solid feel (both leather grips and silicone add that IME).

I thought the 310g/11oz unstrung weight included a stock leather. Also, I like my racquets 10pts headlight strung (so that's what, 12pts HL unstrung?). I would have to add a LOT of weight to the handle to achieve that with this racquet.
 

PeterFig

Professional
Thanks, 310g with leather is quite light for me. So then I'm looking at 2 packs of lead per racquet to the handle... Not sure if I'm sold on the racquet then.

I'm coming from using the PS90 as well and liking the headlight balance, but am really enjoying the 97S quite a bit - I think it's for sure worth a try.
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
Yes it will be a leather grip. Here are the specs (most were posted earlier in the thread).

rQCr2nh.jpg
This keeps getting better and better! I had thought it would be a synthetic leather grip, but if it's like this I can easily make this racquet fit my preferences at a very light weight! :)
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
Thanks, 310g with leather is quite light for me. So then I'm looking at 2 packs of lead per racquet to the handle... Not sure if I'm sold on the racquet then.
It's just a bit of silicone though. I can only recommend you give the magical gel a try. It certainly requires more effort than lead tape, but the results are much better IMO. I remember that the Youtuber USTAplayer injected 70g of silicone into his handle with relative ease.
 

West Coast Ace

G.O.A.T.
I doubt the problem is the frame.
Of course. He's not playing as well as last year. But to think the time trying different setups didn't hurt is pretty naive.
Chasing endorsement $$$$ instead of improving - during the offseason I saw every week how often he was going back and forth (same pro shop in LA).

310g for a tall strong guy - yeah, cool story. But it's the SAME racquet! LOL!
 

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
Of course. He's not playing as well as last year. But to think the time trying different setups didn't hurt is pretty naive... 310g for a tall strong guy - yeah, cool story. But it's the SAME racquet! LOL!
Yeah, the weight/balance thing is an odd one. I wonder if Wilson has done that primarily to cater to the rec players out there who don't like head-light frames - to close off that hole in the 97 range so to speak.
 
Yeah, the weight/balance thing is an odd one. I wonder if Wilson has done that primarily to cater to the rec players out there who don't like head-light frames - to close off that hole in the 97 range so to speak.

I didn't want to question the weight/balance thing, because I feel like I've been nothing but negative about these newer Pro Staffs (I think most people here know my total disregard for the RF97A), and I want to at least try to like these newer Pro Staffs.

But I agree with you, the weight/balance of this frame makes no sense if this frame is to be called a Pro Staff. I guess like you said, it's light and hits the sweetspot for 90% of the rec players out there, but there's enough mass in the head to players with slower swing speed (again, 90% of the rec players out there).

This thing to me, is a thinner-boxed beam version of an APD (or virtually every other racquet out there). I'm excited to try out this racquet, but I'm not convinced.
 

Oakland510

New User
Peter,
I know you had said in another thread that you had hit with the prostaff 95s for a bit.
I have mine with a bit of lead at 3 and 9 and a leather grip but if you could maybe compare the new 97s and 95s
Thank you
 

PeterFig

Professional
Peter,
I know you had said in another thread that you had hit with the prostaff 95s for a bit.
I have mine with a bit of lead at 3 and 9 and a leather grip but if you could maybe compare the new 97s and 95s
Thank you

I had my 95S similar to yours - lead at 3/9 and leather.

The 95S was more headlight so whippier to snap through even with the lead. It also was a much more open string pattern than the 97S so produced more spin.
To me the 97S is still fairly spin friendly but much more control oriented than the 95S. It also is more powerful than the 95S.
They both have that old school ProStaff feel but the 97S feels more solid and stable to me. I did like the 95S and did like it's very fast swing speed, but overall I much more prefer the 97S especially after adding the ~20g to the handle.

Hope this helps
 

PeterFig

Professional
Yeah, the weight/balance thing is an odd one. I wonder if Wilson has done that primarily to cater to the rec players out there who don't like head-light frames - to close off that hole in the 97 range so to speak.

Actually just like the RF97, the Pro Staff 97S was built first (including a number of prototypes) for Dimitrov and only then did we take that exact spec racquet and carry it into production. So the 310g weight and the 3HL balance was the spec that Grigor chose after trying a number of prototypes. He adds 20g to that frame then to get it to his preferred final weight.

So if Grigor likes 330g as his final spec and we're building the racquet for him why don't we just build it at 330g and not 310g you ask? ( see what I'm doing here? a step ahead ;) )
That's a great question and here is the answer: at 310g the racquet in terms of layup had the right feel / flex / etc for him, so if an additional 20g of carbon fibre for example was added to the layup it would then change that feel / flex / etc that he was already happy with. So as a result the preferred layup stays at the 310g that he liked based on playtests, and the 20g is then easily added after the fact to the production frame.

Hope this answers your question about why the 97S comes in at it's spec Bobby Jr.

Peter
 
Hi Peter! Thanks for your insights! It's greatly appreciated.
This frame is really good news as I wasn't able to play good with the RF and PS97.
Since you mentioned flex up there, do you have the Ra info? Unless I'm wrong I don't think this has been told.

Thanks!
 

ThirdEye

Semi-Pro
Actually just like the RF97, the Pro Staff 97S was built first (including a number of prototypes) for Dimitrov and only then did we take that exact spec racquet and carry it into production. So the 310g weight and the 3HL balance was the spec that Grigor chose after trying a number of prototypes. He adds 20g to that frame then to get it to his preferred final weight.

So if Grigor likes 330g as his final spec and we're building the racquet for him why don't we just build it at 330g and not 310g you ask? ( see what I'm doing here? a step ahead ;) )
That's a great question and here is the answer: at 310g the racquet in terms of layup had the right feel / flex / etc for him, so if an additional 20g of carbon fibre for example was added to the layup it would then change that feel / flex / etc that he was already happy with. So as a result the preferred layup stays at the 310g that he liked based on playtests, and the 20g is then easily added after the fact to the production frame.

Hope this answers your question about why the 97S comes in at it's spec Bobby Jr.

Peter

A leather grip would have worked I guess.
 
Actually just like the RF97, the Pro Staff 97S was built first (including a number of prototypes) for Dimitrov and only then did we take that exact spec racquet and carry it into production. So the 310g weight and the 3HL balance was the spec that Grigor chose after trying a number of prototypes. He adds 20g to that frame then to get it to his preferred final weight.

So if Grigor likes 330g as his final spec and we're building the racquet for him why don't we just build it at 330g and not 310g you ask? ( see what I'm doing here? a step ahead ;) )
That's a great question and here is the answer: at 310g the racquet in terms of layup had the right feel / flex / etc for him, so if an additional 20g of carbon fibre for example was added to the layup it would then change that feel / flex / etc that he was already happy with. So as a result the preferred layup stays at the 310g that he liked based on playtests, and the 20g is then easily added after the fact to the production frame.

Peter

Thanks for the explanation Peter. That actually makes perfect sense. Feel/flex/etc are definitely difficult to change. And if you've got a racquet and you've got dialed in, you don't want to change it. This was the same reason why I disregarded the 2014 PS 95, even though I had it leaded up and balanced identical to my 2014 PS 90. It just wasn't the same, lead tape or not.

I think it's cool that Wilson decided to go that route. I just think that this racquet would be difficult to customize because of the way it's balanced. This doesn't seem like a whip of a racquet. But hey, they made it for Grigor Dimitrov. And thanks for bringing back the box(ier) beam back! :)
 

Oakland510

New User
I had my 95S similar to yours - lead at 3/9 and leather.

The 95S was more headlight so whippier to snap through even with the lead. It also was a much more open string pattern than the 97S so produced more spin.
To me the 97S is still fairly spin friendly but much more control oriented than the 95S. It also is more powerful than the 95S.
They both have that old school ProStaff feel but the 97S feels more solid and stable to me. I did like the 95S and did like it's very fast swing speed, but overall I much more prefer the 97S especially after adding the ~20g to the handle.

Hope this helps
Thanks so much
This is sounding like a great frame
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
So no custom work under the grip? He just spins the racquet 20 times waiting to return serve and always finds the right side. Sure.

You're doubting the graphic artist?
I can find the right side every time too, simply because I always wrap the overgrip the same... Just sayin.

You're being unnecessarily harsh right now. I really don't see why you are obsessing over details that are irrelevant for us players, such as custom handles. Unless you are suggesting Wilson somehow makes custom handles for everybody?

If the actual hairpin is the same it's all we can wish for really. My Pro Staff 95 didn't become a different racquet when I heavily customised it. Some of you are misunderstanding "not different racquets" for "identical racquets"... The latter does not exist at all, since there are fluctuations from one racquet to the other and no two racquets are absolutely identical.
 

Bobby Jr

G.O.A.T.
Actually just like the RF97, the Pro Staff 97S was built first (including a number of prototypes) for Dimitrov and only then did we take that exact spec racquet and carry it into production. So the 310g weight and the 3HL balance was the spec that Grigor chose after trying a number of prototypes. He adds 20g to that frame then to get it to his preferred final weight....

Hope this answers your question about why the 97S comes in at it's spec Bobby Jr.
I didn't ask a question. You just confirmed, basically, what I guessed: that Wilson made a frame with a very different balance/weight combo to the others in the 97 range (because lots of people rec players like light, head heavy racquets unlike the other 97s) - and a bonus of that is being able to easily modify the balance yourself if you wish.

The main question about the Dimitrov frame which I'd like answered is how flexible it is.
 

oble

Hall of Fame
Actually just like the RF97, the Pro Staff 97S was built first (including a number of prototypes) for Dimitrov and only then did we take that exact spec racquet and carry it into production. So the 310g weight and the 3HL balance was the spec that Grigor chose after trying a number of prototypes. He adds 20g to that frame then to get it to his preferred final weight.

So if Grigor likes 330g as his final spec and we're building the racquet for him why don't we just build it at 330g and not 310g you ask? ( see what I'm doing here? a step ahead ;) )
That's a great question and here is the answer: at 310g the racquet in terms of layup had the right feel / flex / etc for him, so if an additional 20g of carbon fibre for example was added to the layup it would then change that feel / flex / etc that he was already happy with. So as a result the preferred layup stays at the 310g that he liked based on playtests, and the 20g is then easily added after the fact to the production frame.

Hope this answers your question about why the 97S comes in at it's spec Bobby Jr.

Peter
This is definitely interesting and good info. Thanks mate.

So, 330g unstrung, about 345 grams strung? Add another 4 or 5 grams if the added 20g excludes the Tourna grip. That's surprisingly light compared to what we know about what other top pros use.
 

borgpro

Semi-Pro
I had my 95S similar to yours - lead at 3/9 and leather.

The 95S was more headlight so whippier to snap through even with the lead. It also was a much more open string pattern than the 97S so produced more spin.
To me the 97S is still fairly spin friendly but much more control oriented than the 95S. It also is more powerful than the 95S.
They both have that old school ProStaff feel but the 97S feels more solid and stable to me. I did like the 95S and did like it's very fast swing speed, but overall I much more prefer the 97S especially after adding the ~20g to the handle.

Hope this helps

Hi Peter, you previously posted me how to put lead inside the grip together with silicone, but in the new forum lay out I can not find it back! Could you please tell me once more? I would like to add 20 grams, without removing the leather grip.. thanks!
 

Automatix

Legend
The magic of Roger is indisputable. When his racquet was supposed to come out the marketing machine was working like crazy.
Dimitrov on the other hand... well, lets say that any info about the upcoming PS97S 18x17 originates from this very thread. ;)
 
That is be
The magic of Roger is indisputable. When his racquet was supposed to come out the marketing machine was working like crazy.
Dimitrov on the other hand... well, lets say that any info about the upcoming PS97S 18x17 originates from this very thread. ;)
In my opinion the marketing for the Rf was there because it is a signature frame. This might be dimitrovs endorsed frame but it is not a signature
 
I am chomping at the bit for this one Peter! ;) BHBH

Actually just like the RF97, the Pro Staff 97S was built first (including a number of prototypes) for Dimitrov and only then did we take that exact spec racquet and carry it into production. So the 310g weight and the 3HL balance was the spec that Grigor chose after trying a number of prototypes. He adds 20g to that frame then to get it to his preferred final weight.

So if Grigor likes 330g as his final spec and we're building the racquet for him why don't we just build it at 330g and not 310g you ask? ( see what I'm doing here? a step ahead ;) )
That's a great question and here is the answer: at 310g the racquet in terms of layup had the right feel / flex / etc for him, so if an additional 20g of carbon fibre for example was added to the layup it would then change that feel / flex / etc that he was already happy with. So as a result the preferred layup stays at the 310g that he liked based on playtests, and the 20g is then easily added after the fact to the production frame.

Hope this answers your question about why the 97S comes in at it's spec Bobby Jr.

Peter
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
The balance makes the racquet rather head heavy and suggests one good reason why manufacturers tend not to make real pro racquets: they require modification which is a lot of trial and error.

Despite the prevalence of DIY tinkerers around here, it is still a bit of a chore for most who like to dabble at most, and Dimitrov has tons of free help.

It's good that the racquet has a leather grip, but a synthetic grip would provide one easy way to make it headlight as with the Blade.
 

LiquidWhip

Rookie
Peter,

Could you give us an indication of how the stability of this racquet compares to the RF97 as I've found the PS97 somewhat lacking in this department compared to the RF97?
 
Top