Best racquet

[ElTexan]

Best racquet of all time?

This one was a game changer in ~1991, and not as crazily heavy as the 6.1 version that Edberg used:

 

[Hs0022]

Best racquet of all time?

This one was a game changer in ~1991, and not as crazily heavy as the 6.1 version that Edberg used:

Nah. Maybe for some beginners who are too lazy to build upper body strength it’s a good stick but you can’t get proper precision in serve and ground strokes with it. The beam is too wide. No feel whatsoever on the shots. “Best” is a relative term.

 

[ElTexan]

Nah. Maybe for some beginners who are too lazy to build upper body strength it’s a good stick but you can’t get proper precision in serve and ground strokes with it. The beam is too wide. No feel whatsoever on the shots. “Best” is a relative term.

You’re right. Only Stefan Edberg and Steffi Graf used it. What do they know?

 

[Hs0022]

As far as I know Edberg used the Pro Staff 6.0 St. Vincent the same one Pete used and Fed used when he started out. It had a beam width of around 17 mm. The wide beam of this frame ( which looks like 21 mm+) would not be good for precision for service nor would it be good for generating pace or control. The only good it can do is absorb impact shock that beginners with less muscle strength would probably need.

 

[Hs0022]

There are tons of racquets in stores with pictures of players like Federer or Nadal or the Williams sisters. That does not mean they use those frames. They simply endorse the products with their names so it would sell. Besides the frame you referenced above has a headsize of 110 sqin. Other than a few no name female players on the circuit I don’t know what pros would even consider using a frame with as large a headsize as that.

 

[ElTexan]

There are tons of racquets in stores with pictures of players like Federer or Nadal or the Williams sisters. That does not mean they use those frames. They simply endorse the products with their names so it would sell. Besides the frame you referenced above has a headsize of 110 sqin. Other than a few no name female players on the circuit I don’t know what pros would even consider using a frame with as large a headsize as that.

1. I own that racquet. i took that pic. It’s 95.
2. I was alive when Edberg and Steffi were winning championships with these racquets.
3. Agassi won a career grand slam with 110.


Dude. L OH L

 

[ElTexan]

As far as I know Edberg used the Pro Staff 6.0 St. Vincent the same one Pete used and Fed used when he started out. It had a beam width of around 17 mm. The wide beam of this frame ( which looks like 21 mm+) would not be good for precision for service nor would it be good for generating pace or control. The only good it can do is absorb impact shock that beginners with less muscle strength would probably need.

Edberg won 2 USOPENs with the Pro Staff Classic 6.1. Dude, you need to stop embarrassing yourself.

 

[Hs0022]

1. I own that racquet. i took that pic. It’s 95.
2. I was alive when Edberg and Steffi were winning championships with these racquets.
3. Agassi won a career grand slam with 110.

Dude. L OH L

So now I am arguing with a dead person?
I was told never to argue with an idiot or a dead person. Agassi’s frame was not 110 it was a 107 sqin. It was also very heavy 13oz. frame.

Edberg was one of Federer’s idols along with Pete and also used the Wilson Pro Staff 85 (6.0) like Sampras and his racquet looks different in pictures because it’s a goddamn Paint Job ( to endorse Wilson’s new line of PS 95 6.1 ) to make fools like you believe and buy that racquet from the market shelves.
Federer himself started out as a junior with the PS 85 6.0 and the frame he played with Sampras at Wimbledon was the same both of them played with.


So my conclusion is that you believed all these years that the racket you used was also used by Edberg. Typical consumer illusion syndrome.

I think I am gonna stop here and leave the field to you to do more clueless babbling. That was my last post and I will leave you alone in your useless and redundant thread.

 

[cezero]

I don't think there's any such thing as best racquet nowadays. It's more about which frame + strings work best for you.

The OP is certainly right, though. The ProStaff was certainly a game changer, and prototype for a lot of other racquets that were used on a grand scale. Strings have been the biggest advancement in tennis tech over the past 15 years, and I'm really interested in what the next prototypical frame might be made of. As if they aren't all already pretty much bazookas.

My brother-in-law loved his good ol' Jack Kramer, lol

 

[ill]

so many of my friends play with the Babolat Pure Drive these days, so I have to think that is in the conversation.

growing up, for me, it was between the Head TiRadical and the Pro Staff 6.1 as the most popular racquets out there.

 

[desert heat]

You’re right. Only Stefan Edberg and Steffi Graf used it. What do they know?

they play on a slightly different level than most of us and have different needs that the typical player. the prostaff that sampras used from had a bigger impact on the game.

i would probably chose the prince pro aluminum oversize. it ushered in the oversize revolution.

 

[Hs0022]

Here is a link:

10 Racquets That Changed The Game

In my opinion the Prince Graphite should be ranked much higher up probably in top three.

 

[nuraman00]

So now I am arguing with a dead person?
I was told never to argue with an idiot or a dead person. Agassi’s frame was not 110 it was a 107 sqin. It was also very heavy 13oz. frame.

Edberg was one of Federer’s idols along with Pete and also used the Wilson Pro Staff 85 (6.0) like Sampras and his racquet looks different in pictures because it’s a goddamn Paint Job ( to endorse Wilson’s new line of PS 95 6.1 ) to make fools like you believe and buy that racquet from the market shelves.
Federer himself started out as a junior with the PS 85 6.0 and the frame he played with Sampras at Wimbledon was the same both of them played with.


So my conclusion is that you believed all these years that the racket you used was also used by Edberg. Typical consumer illusion syndrome.

I think I am gonna stop here and leave the field to you to do more clueless babbling. That was my last post and I will leave you alone in your useless and redundant thread.

What's the difference between 6.0 and 6.1?

 

[nuraman00]

What's the difference between 6.0 and 6.1?

Bump? What do those numbers mean?

What about 7.2?

This is my racket from the mid 90s.

RARE NEW Wilson Hammer 7.2 Midplus 95 4 1/2 grip Tennis Racquet | eBay

According to that, it has a 16x19 pattern and 95 square inch headsize.

 

[Hs0022]

What's the difference between 6.0 and 6.1?

It’s the swing index. Technically they are very close specs both being in the six region. What it means is that players with a larger backswing or those that use a full swing motion would benefit from playing with a 6 or 7 range frame. A shorter backswing like Agassi used to have would be more conducive with frames in the 5 region like a 5.5. Note this is mainly the Wilson models.

 

[nuraman00]

It’s the swing index. Technically they are very close specs both being in the six region. What it means is that players with a larger backswing or those that use a full swing motion would benefit from playing with a 6 or 7 range frame. A shorter backswing like Agassi used to have would be more conducive with frames in the 5 region like a 5.5. Note this is mainly the Wilson models.

Thanks. Maybe that's why the Hammer 7.2 has felt pretty good to me all of this time. I still am going to demo a few modern racquets later this year.

After getting back to playing, after a 7 year break, I find that I'm doing a decent job keeping off balance shots in play.

The racquet probably helps with that.

 

[Hs0022]

I hit some balls against the backboard yesterday after a long time. Felt good with the forehand. Teaching my son now

 

[nuraman00]

How old is he?

 

[Hs0022]

How old is he?

He just turned eight.

 

[Melissa Williams]

Pro Staff Classic 6.1 :3