Wilson releasing Pro Staff 97S for Dimitrov (specs. included)
- Thread starter sixone90
- Start date
fundrazer
G.O.A.T.
I'm liking his shoes in that video. New colorway for US Open?
Indeed not, just his Vapor 9 ID's
FedLIKEnot
Professional
His ID's have always matched the outfits for that season. So likely his shoes will represent the colors he will wear for the hard court swing leading up to the U.S. OPEN.
In addition anyone know who he was working with. I love the drills he was doing working on angles and being aggressive even back in the court. Something long overdue.
kingcheetah
Hall of Fame
I'll be curious to see the reviews on this one-- 18x17 string pattern on a 97 box beam sounds like it would be a good setup, but the weight and balance are a bit of a head-scratcher. Lead tape sales will likely go up when some of the players that dislike the RF97 stiffness give this racquet a shot.
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
It's not a box beam.
Franklin_B
Semi-Pro
How would gut/poly durability go in an 18x17 pattern compared to the RF97 16x19? From the photo above it looks a bit more dense than the RF.
THE FIGHTER
Hall of Fame
there are more mains, but less crosses compared to the RF97. spaces between mains look tighter, but spaces between crosses look much wider.
Franklin_B
Semi-Pro
I can see that, my question is would the durability be better since there would be more mains in contact with the ball? or worse because the mains would have fewer crosses to distribute pressure across the stringbed?
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
The concept of having less crosses means that the mains can slide around easier and thus more. Therefore, durability will be less than that of a traditional stringbed.
Will it be as bad as the earlier 16x15 patterns? No, still worse than a traditional stringbed though.
THE FIGHTER
Hall of Fame
ah i see, that's a good question. here's my take:
in comparison to the relation between the RF97 and the new 97s, the difference wouldn't be as stark as, for example, the difference between the ps95 w/ a 16x19 pattern and the ps95s w/16x15. This is because there are 4 less crosses and the same number of mains between the two 95sqin sticks. obviously the ps95s will break strings quicker than the ps95 because friction during movement and snap back are distributed to fewer contact points on a single main. the same will be true for the relation between the RF97 and the 18x17 RF even though the 18x17 has more mains than the RF97. that said, the difference will be more subtle than that of the 95 and 95s given as examples.
String breakage in relation to top spin is mostly dependent on the cross strings interaction with any given main string; all it takes for a racquet to be temporarily decommissioned is one string, after all. Although the difference between 16 and 18 mains matters in the RF sticks due to slightly more restricted movement of the mains in the 18x17, the difference between 19 and 17 crosses matters more, since any given main will have fewer points of contact between the crosses. Conversely, If the new dimitrov racquet had a 17x18 pattern, it would not break strings as quickly as the RF97 or the actual dimitrov 97.
comparing the RF97 to the 97s, the 97s would still eat through strings more quickly, less noticeably so than other examples.
Franklin_B
Semi-Pro
Thanks for the input guys. I guess I'll have to check this one out with a poly setup. Not sure I can afford to run through gut/poly any faster than the RF97 does already.
SpinToWin
Talk Tennis Guru
Just use the thickest gut mains you can get and Revolve 15 (or so) in the crosses... Should do the trick
g4driver
Legend
Franklin_B
Semi-Pro
For the RF or the 97S?
AeroPro Staff
Rookie
Should work for both of them I would think
Where can I find any more news on this new stick? Weight? Flex?
AeroPro Staff
Rookie
Look no further than this thread. Weight was included in the very first post. Flex, we dont know yet.
AeroPro Staff
Rookie
Dimitrov is rocking the paintjob in D.C. this week!
http://kutv.com/sports/talkin-sports/andy-murray-returns-to-dc-tournament-for-1st-time-since-2006
http://kutv.com/sports/talkin-sports/andy-murray-returns-to-dc-tournament-for-1st-time-since-2006
Say Chi Sin Lo
G.O.A.T.
I love how people are losing their s*** over a PJ that we've seen for over a year, but with a slight variation (Gold fonts, mind blown!)
SpinToWin
Talk Tennis Guru
Yeah should work for any racquet where strings are breaking prematurely
Franklin_B
Semi-Pro
Yep, I get the generality of thicker strings lasting longer. Thought I would check if you were talking about having tried it in a similar pattern to the 97S or not.
Either way it's probably worth a demo for me.
AeroPro Staff
Rookie
No need to get upset over it. A paintjob means advertising is starting.
SpinToWin
Talk Tennis Guru
Well... There is no similar racquet on the market as of now really, so it's rather hard to say... How that 18x17 string pattern treats strings will be interesting, though @PeterFig has commented that he does not find much of a difference in this regard to the RF97, at least from what I can recall...
g4driver
Legend
That is why I have been asking for a 16x17 pattern since the Steam 99S was released in Jan 2013.
Wilson will probably never release a 16x17, but someone is going to do it. Seems that Wilson is replacing the 99S 16x15 with a Burn 18x17, but ignoring the guys who don't like 18x19 or 18x20 frames and who want something more open than 16x19, without going to 16x15
The 18x19 crowd can go spin variant with 18x17, but if you are a 16x19 user, Wilson makes you choose 16x15 or 18x16 because of the "less crosses than mains" marketing hype.
Wilson why won't you give us a 16x17 pattern in a 99 or 100 square inch mid flex 65 to 67ish 300 gram frame ?
THE FIGHTER
Hall of Fame
You're very cynical.
AeroPro Staff
Rookie
Why judge so early? We have never had a string pattern like this before. Maybe its what you are looking for!That is why I have been asking for a 16x17 pattern since the Steam 99S was released in Jan 2013.
Wilson will probably never release a 16x17, but someone is going to do it. Seems that Wilson is replacing the 99S 16x15 with a Burn 18x17, but ignoring the guys who don't like 18x19 or 18x20 frames and who want something more open than 16x19, without going to 16x15
The 18x19 crowd can go spin variant with 18x17, but if you are a 16x19 user, Wilson makes you choose 16x15 or 18x16 because of the "less crosses than mains" marketing hype.
Wilson why won't you give us a 16x17 pattern in a 99 or 100 square inch mid flex 65 to 67ish 300 gram frame ?
AeroPro Staff
Rookie
Wait. Is dimitrovs name on all 97S racquets? I thought it was just on his.
Automatix
Legend
A 16x17 string pattern is indeed nice, anyone who played with a Yonex Pro RD 70 95 can confirm this.That is why I have been asking for a 16x17 pattern since the Steam 99S was released in Jan 2013.
Wilson will probably never release a 16x17, but someone is going to do it. Seems that Wilson is replacing the 99S 16x15 with a Burn 18x17, but ignoring the guys who don't like 18x19 or 18x20 frames and who want something more open than 16x19, without going to 16x15
The 18x19 crowd can go spin variant with 18x17, but if you are a 16x19 user, Wilson makes you choose 16x15 or 18x16 because of the "less crosses than mains" marketing hype.
Wilson why won't you give us a 16x17 pattern in a 99 or 100 square inch mid flex 65 to 67ish 300 gram frame ?
Still you should give this new pattern a chance. How a certain string pattern behaves is more than just the number of mains and crosses but also their placement throughout the racquet head. 18x16 with 8 mains going through the bridge is noticeably different from the same string pattern with 6 mains going through the bridge.
For me Wilson started this whole spin frenzy without thinking.
For the most part they put an ultra open, string breakage prone 16x15 pattern in powerful & stiff racquets and surprise, surprise... strings broke fast.
From my experience the mentioned 16x17 pattern would suffice.
Back in the day Wilson did have an 18x18 string pattern frame but there wasn't anything special about it, the weird frame geometry didn't help.
Wilson will stick to its patent which is for patterns with less crosses than mains.
Still I think the 18x17 pattern in the right frame (softer, circa 100 square inch, >20mm) can be a smash hit by providing enhanced control over classic 16 main patterns while being more accessible to recreational players by giving easier access to spin, comfort, dwell and such.
g4driver
Legend
How am I judging a frame I want that doesn't exist, isn't being released, and not being tested ?
I have been wanting a 99 or 100 square inch 300 gram frame 16x17 pattern for two years.
I hope the PS97S is very successful, but 19 mm is slightly thinner than I am used to.
The 21 mm Head Speed MPA 16x16 is probably as close as I have come to the specs on the 97S.
Just wish Wilson would listen to all the feedback from the folks who bought 99S frames and who complained about volleys, flattening out shots with it, and the need for a few more cross strings. The feedback is all the guys who bought the frame then abandoned it. Wilson just seemed to ignore that feedback IMO.
West Coast Ace
G.O.A.T.
My friend was just telling me he only uses his Wilson for singles; completely useless in doubles because of the volleying. Goes back to his Head.
g4driver
Legend
Appreciate your post and while I agree with 99% of it, there is no legal requirement for Wilson to only make "less crosses than mains Spin Effect Frames" , 16x19, 18x19, or 18x20 frames.
Wilson and any other company can legally make a 16x17 frame. 16x17 simply doesn't fall under their patent, or marketing of "Spin Effect"
I will certainly give the PS97S a chance, and hope I love it, but why would Wilson ignore the feedback of thousands of buyers who bought 99S frames when they gave the same repeated feedback?
Last edited:
g4driver
Legend
That is what I am about to do. I can play against 4.5 men with a 99S, but I do find the 16x16 Head Speed MPA is more effective, especially at the net.
I own five 99S frames, all 340 to 342 grams, 320 Swingweight, measure on a Prince Precision Tuning Center. I had six other guys from my old team who use the same strings in their 99s that I use. Only one of those guys plays singles.
I got one guy to buy a 99S in Jan 2013. The other five guys saw his game improve with it so they switched to the 99S. Granted, you have to generate descent racquet head speed to play with a 99S, but I still love the frame. I just Wilson would listen to guys like me who probably have as much or more time on the court with a 99S than probably anyone at Wilson.
I log more hours a month on a court than I log in a jet as a pilot. Not a pro tennis player, but guessing there are not many tennis players who have hit more hours with a 99S than I have over the years. I just don't see that many 99S frames out there, and I play a lot of rec tennis. Most guys bought it and moved on long ago. That is feedback. And no, the 18x16 patterns weren't the answer for me.
Franklin_B
Semi-Pro
I guess the 18x16 98S would be most similar... but a bit more open. I've never hit very well with the blades though.
volleynets
Hall of Fame
I don't get it. Sounds like something is wrong with his volley technique.
AeroPro Staff
Rookie
No no no. I'm saying that maybe you are being a little quick to judge the 18X17 string pattern of the 97S. I'm like you, I've been using 16x19 and 16x15 racquets for a while. I'm switching to the 97S most likely because it will hopefully be a good balance of everything I want out of the racquet.How am I judging a frame I want that doesn't exist, isn't being released, and not being tested ?
I have been wanting a 99 or 100 square inch 300 gram frame 16x17 pattern for two years.
I hope the PS97S is very successful, but 19 mm is slightly thinner than I am used to.
The 21 mm Head Speed MPA 16x16 is probably as close as I have come to the specs on the 97S.
Just wish Wilson would listen to all the feedback from the folks who bought 99S frames and who complained about volleys, flattening out shots with it, and the need for a few more cross strings. The feedback is all the guys who bought the frame then abandoned it. Wilson just seemed to ignore that feedback IMO.
g4driver
Legend
Thanks AeroPro Staff-
I am a hack. And not a very good one at that. I will give the PS97S a great chance and hope it works.
The 6.1 95S was close to working, but I simply shanked more balls with the 95S and like the 98/99/100 head size frames more due to less misshits.
I am very fortunate to work about nine days a month and have about 21-22 days a month available to hit due to a flexible schedule.. The 99S made me better than all the 16x19 frames, and tonight when I played doubles every time my partner served, I switched to my Head SMPA 16x16 because of the volleys and my goal to control the net.
If the 97S doesn't have enough power, I will drop tension in strings and find something that hopefully works- right now cyclone tour 16 58m/56x works pretty well.
Hmmm, I love the 342 gram/ 320 Swingweight setup on my Steam 99S. Hint: use TW matched racquet service and Paul Reed to customize your frames and he will dig through 12 frames to match just 2. Paul Reed does amazing work for TW.
I watched one of my teammates play tonight o
I am a hack. And not a very good one at that. I will give the PS97S a great chance and hope it works.
The 6.1 95S was close to working, but I simply shanked more balls with the 95S and like the 98/99/100 head size frames more due to less misshits.
I am very fortunate to work about nine days a month and have about 21-22 days a month available to hit due to a flexible schedule.. The 99S made me better than all the 16x19 frames, and tonight when I played doubles every time my partner served, I switched to my Head SMPA 16x16 because of the volleys and my goal to control the net.
If the 97S doesn't have enough power, I will drop tension in strings and find something that hopefully works- right now cyclone tour 16 58m/56x works pretty well.
Hmmm, I love the 342 gram/ 320 Swingweight setup on my Steam 99S. Hint: use TW matched racquet service and Paul Reed to customize your frames and he will dig through 12 frames to match just 2. Paul Reed does amazing work for TW.
I watched one of my teammates play tonight o
Last edited:
Automatix
Legend
Yes, naturally. I was referring to the "logic" behind sticking to some designs. Companies like to stand out, that's why we didn't have many "stealth" paintjobs. With these string patterns the problem is that anyone can make patterns with an equal number of mains and crosses, not to mention ones with more crosses than mains. And even if patterns such as 16x16 or 16x17 would be superior in some terms* Wilson would still stick with its design and would put more effort in marketing than admitting they went just a step too far.
The S.E.T. concept is still quite fresh. Steam 99s debut was in 2013. So the first introduced S.E.T. pattern is about 2.5 years old.
If we take into account they are constantly tweaking it 16x15 -> 18x16 -> 18x17 we can assume that if they ever decide to drop it, it won't be for at least another gear cycle (2 years).
These designs have pros and cons.
16x15 - great power & spin but at the cost of string life and IMHO when the match goes on and your RHS goes down the balls start sailing on you.
18x16 - less spin than the above but for me definitely more spin than 18x20, though less than a 16x17 for example, also depending on string placement the launch angle can be somewhat of an acquired taste.
16x17 - love it, love it, love it... depending on string placement some 16x18 racquets come close to this, for me PCG100.
I try to underline the importance of string placement. A Yonex Vcore Tour G and Pacific X Force 98 string beds play very differently even though both are a 16x20. Of course it isn't really good to isolate the pattern since the racquets are so different, to truly compare it would be best to have 2 identical racquets differing only in string placement but that's not gonna happen.
Sounds to me you would probably be happier with the Burn FTS 99S if you could bare with the BEAUTIFUL paintjob.
* - Funny enough people from Yonex argue that their 16x17 string pattern wouldn't find enough appeal in the tennis community due to less control and faster string breakage.
g4driver
Legend
Thanks much Automatix,
You get my point and I hope I find something that works.
What frame is the PCG100? Pacific or Prince ? And Is it still available ?
I could deal with the Burn FTS Paintjob, but like many, I can't deal with stiff stiff frames. The 99S plays less stiff than it's. 69/70 RDC due to a uber open stringbed,,but even then the 99S is my at my limit for stiffness.
Glad I am not the only one who sees that Wilson would rather stick to their marketing hype than admitting a very simple truth : that 16x15 is a bridge too far.
I really don't know how many people still play with those frames, but I can't imagine Wilson selling too many those days with so many other 18x16 choices they offer.
If you have any suggestions, for a 16x18 frame or 18x16 98/99/100 square inch, 64-68 RDC, around 300 to 315 grams, I would truly appreciate your advice
I like frames around 340 grams, 8 HL, 320/325 Swingweight if that helps.
my Head Speed MPA 16x16 is. 340 grams, 320 swingweight, and is a step in the right direction. Heck it could be the perfect frame, and I just don't know it. The more I hit with it, the more I like it though.
The 99S works better in singles than doubles for me, but I am sticking with it until I find something as I transition away from 4.0 singles.
You get my point and I hope I find something that works.
What frame is the PCG100? Pacific or Prince ? And Is it still available ?
I could deal with the Burn FTS Paintjob, but like many, I can't deal with stiff stiff frames. The 99S plays less stiff than it's. 69/70 RDC due to a uber open stringbed,,but even then the 99S is my at my limit for stiffness.
Glad I am not the only one who sees that Wilson would rather stick to their marketing hype than admitting a very simple truth : that 16x15 is a bridge too far.
I really don't know how many people still play with those frames, but I can't imagine Wilson selling too many those days with so many other 18x16 choices they offer.
If you have any suggestions, for a 16x18 frame or 18x16 98/99/100 square inch, 64-68 RDC, around 300 to 315 grams, I would truly appreciate your advice
I like frames around 340 grams, 8 HL, 320/325 Swingweight if that helps.
my Head Speed MPA 16x16 is. 340 grams, 320 swingweight, and is a step in the right direction. Heck it could be the perfect frame, and I just don't know it. The more I hit with it, the more I like it though.
The 99S works better in singles than doubles for me, but I am sticking with it until I find something as I transition away from 4.0 singles.
Last edited:
SpinToWin
Talk Tennis Guru
Prince Classic Graphite 100?
Prince Textreme 100T modified?
Automatix
Legend
Sorry, bad habit of using abbreviations. PCG 100 as in Prince Graphite Classic 100, a reissue which is still being sold. For me the stringbed response and behaviour is literally the closest to the 16x17 on the Yonex Pro RD 95 out of all the frames I've played with. The central mains are spaced very similarly, the crosses are packed a bit more tightly. Now, this doesn't mean that the 100 plays like a 16x17 Yonex but for me it is currently the only frame which can mimic that specific behaviour. Just for reference I've played with the Prince Tour 100T ESP which is a 16x16 pattern and didn't find that "it" factor and actually found to get more spin out of the 16x17 pattern, maybe due to the fact that I am not an O-port fan or maybe because the central mains on the 100T ESP are packed more densely.
What I'm missing in the PCG100 is lack of free power, this is the reason I'm so interested in the Burn. Thicker beam but not by much and hopefully only slightly stiffer, hoping for a 64-66RA.
I'm with you. The pattern can take over some of the stiffness but there's only so much a string and/or string pattern can do.
I'm eagerly waiting for the Burn FST 99S to come out so I can demo it. However if the stiffness is north of 66 I'll pass. I'd also like to demo the 97S but the balance & weight combo is not my cup of tea. 335mm is a bit to close to even and depending on the swingweight it might be very tough to get it to a nice headlight balance while maintaining a manageable swingweight.
You're preferred specs are actually close to my ready to play (with strings, overgrip, dampener etc.) PCG 100 which is 8HL, 330g, swingweight 316, stiffness 62.
Right, I actually know quite a bit of people who play with the 18x16 pattern and none with a 16x15. To tell the truth even those who use Prince frames with a 16x16 stringpattern are looking for an alternative due to string breakage.
Automatix
Legend
Prince Classic Graphite 100, although indeed modified and still in the works in hope of achieving optimal performance.
Automatix
Legend
Just to elaborate on this. Of course one can string the racquet with an ultra soft multifilament or gut but then you don't get as much spin as you would with a poly, besides the all to well known string breakage pops up, not to mention it's really easy to send a homerun instead of a nice and deep groundie.
smalahove
Hall of Fame
@g4driver Have you tried the Prince Tour Pro 100 ESP? A great thin beamed spin frame (16x16). If you're looking for a Wilson option, I'd def wait for the new Burn FST frames.
Btw. I wouldn't get my hopes up too much for the spin effect in the PS97S.
Ime, the spin effect from f.inst. the PS95S was only marginal compared to the PS95.
My old 93 sq inch Prince Graphite Pro (Series) 90 has a 14x18 pattern, but still is no spin monster compared to f.inst. the Prince Tour 98 ESP. Which is not so strange since the actual string pattern in the sweet zone is very similar to the one in my Tour Textreme 95 (16x19).
Btw. I wouldn't get my hopes up too much for the spin effect in the PS97S.
Ime, the spin effect from f.inst. the PS95S was only marginal compared to the PS95.
My old 93 sq inch Prince Graphite Pro (Series) 90 has a 14x18 pattern, but still is no spin monster compared to f.inst. the Prince Tour 98 ESP. Which is not so strange since the actual string pattern in the sweet zone is very similar to the one in my Tour Textreme 95 (16x19).
