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.
Here are a few photos of Grigor Dimitrov's rackets taken recently:
![]()
![]()
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?
The anticipation is killing me…. This frame is so promisingBOX 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!It's covering 5 crosses, and these are even more spread out crosses due to Wilson's "Spin" design.
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![]()
The anticipation is killing me…. This frame is so promising
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!It's covering 5 crosses, and these are even more spread out crosses due to Wilson's "Spin" design.
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 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 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).
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 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.
Yes it will be a leather grip. Here are the specs (most were posted earlier in the thread).
![]()
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.
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!Yes it will be a leather grip. Here are the specs (most were posted earlier in the thread).
![]()
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.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.
Saw him with a PS6.1 PJ in his first round.
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.I doubt the problem is the frame.
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.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.
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
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
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 so muchI 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
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.330g - he adds 20g of weight to the stock frame.
You're doubting the graphic artist?According to that post Dimi is still testing racquets...?
I can find the right side every time too, simply because I always wrap the overgrip the same... Just sayin.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 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.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.
This is definitely interesting and good info. Thanks mate.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
Here are a few photos of Grigor Dimitrov's rackets taken recently:
![]()
![]()
![]()
Hope these can be of help,
ProStringing
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
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 signatureThe 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.![]()
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
That's actually a very good idea…Wilson should dust off the Donnay idea of weighted butt caps for this racquet.