After being with me for 20+ years, my old faithful, the ProStaff Classic 6.1 cracked.
Not from racket abuse, but from a hard scrape trying to return a deep, flat and low shot.
It'll be nice if it's just the grommet, but there is a faint buzzing vibration whenever ball contact is made.
About time as well, I guess... After all, this well loved racket had been through at least 200 stringjobs...
Other than wanting more spin, another commonly asked question is which string plays most similarly to natural gut.
Powerful, yet soft, with incredible feel and plushy cupping action, it is little wonder why natural gut managed to seduce and mesmerize so many who have tried it.
I have tested Babolat VS (both with and without BT7), Pacific Classic, Klip Legend and Global Gut. Some clearly needs a fair bit of breaking-in while others played beautifully from the first hit.
So far, my impression of natural gut is that it:
- is soft, comfortable and powerful,
- is very resilient and quick to recover,
- offers tight pocketing and rebounds accurately, and
- holds tension very well.
Only the price is inhibiting. And it does not help that gut and moisture cannot get along at all.
For several months, I have been thinking, testing and re-testing how to replicate the feel of natural gut using a fullbed of synthetic gut.
Exact reproduction is impossible. My aim is to balance the variables of softness, power, comfort, accuracy and resilience and try to get as close to the feel of natural gut as possible.
Probably into my 14th or 15th iteration now, I believe I am getting close. Or I have been so obsessed, I am getting delusional...
Got my old friend "M", who has one of the most sensitive pair of hands I know to try this setup in his Yonex RD-7. On several previous occasions, M could tell a mere 2 grams difference in racket weight! I value his feedback, plus he will be playing with a regular user of natural gut!
It was a mess stringing this setup. Definitely not recommended for those who prefer traditional and compliant stringing methods.
Since M prefers the raw feel of the stringbed, with only a very light dampening, I weaved and tied a rubber band across several main strings for him.
Playtest:
- M has just returned after spending half a year outstation without tennis, so his game was very rusty. Where he was, the winter months gave him little opportunity for exercise.
- With that perspective in mind, M felt that this setup was "very playable" indeed.
- He remarked this stringjob offered a lot of power but yet gave him a strong sense of being in full control.
- For as long as I have strung his several RD-7 rackets for him, we have never been able to juggle both power and control together due to the racket's very soft flex of only RA54! So I believe this "natural gut" simulation is going in the right direction.
- In his words, he played a "much easier game" with this setup although there was "not much spin" from the fullbed syn gut.
- That encouraged him to hit much flatter than usual. While I did not see him play, I think his sudden change from "I want more spin!" to hitting flat could be due to the very addictive plush and deep pocketing this stringing offered, just like natural gut!
- Even when I got a non-tennis playing friend to just bounce the ball using this setup, the only comment was how comfortable the centre of the stringbed felt.
- I have strung up a similar replica on my ProStaff Classic 6.1. Will test it and update here again...
10Apr2014 update:
- Couldn't find a partner and couldn't wait, so I hit the wall with the ProStaff Classic.
- The stringbed felt a little stiff initially but softened after about 10 minutes of hitting.
- The most distinct difference I felt was in how the stringbed "pocketed" the ball.
- When hard flat shots contacted the stringbed of traditionally strung syn gut or multi, there was no "wrap-around" feeling of the strings around the ball. Just a slight cushioned feeling as the ball pressed into the stringbed.
- But with this setup, I could feel the ball slightly deeper in the stringbed like a "cupping" action.
- Compared to normal syn gut, even multi, this rebound was very swift, accurate and powerful. It was a combined feeling of softness and tightness together.
- The loading of power was clearly felt in the strings followed by the release, which was somewhat like a mini-catapult propelling the ball forward in the intended direction.
- Off-centre hits remained unpleasant. It was mainly those which contacted near the sweetspot that offered this gut-like feel.
- When I swapped to my Yamaha racket, the stringbed felt so lifeless and tired. More energy, or a fuller swing was needed to hit the same ball above the net line on the wall, while standing the same distance away.
- I will hit some more with this and update again...
11Apr2014 update:
- Played two sets with "W" using this setup.
- Warm-up rallies were very nice. The slower pace shots gave me time to prepare and aim for better contacts which made the strings more enjoyable.
- Power remained very good and very controllable. It was nowhere near trampoline-like, as I could feel the resistance and tightening of the stringbed during pocketing. This gave me enough confidence in the stringbed for me to call any miss-hits my mistake.
- Because of the power, I no longer needed to force nor swing that hard. I let the racket and stringbed do more of the work for me. As a result, I felt my control, placement and direction improved, simply because I needed to do less.
- Generally, the axiom goes "More power, less control" and vice versa. But in this case, the "free" power allowed me to focus on control much better!
- Serves were much easier and required less work too.
- Spin was average, but on centre hits where the pocketing was deepest, a few topspin shots curled down into the court when I thought they were flying out.
- Below pic shows stringbed after 3 hours of use.
Note:
I will not be updating this post anymore. For those who think this is gibberish, feel free to treat this as fiction, or that I was drunk while writing, whichever pleases you more.
Both Z and I have unfinished business with this frame. (link1)(link2)
In online forums, this racket is notoriously difficult to string.
Specifically, it is the combination of:
(1) very low swingweight of about 300 kg/cm²,
(2) very flexible hoop and throat, and
(3) open 16x15 string pattern.
Conventional wisdom dictates:
(1) Low swingweight = low power
So lower tensions or soft and powerful strings like gut or multifilaments are recommended.
(2) Flexible hoops affects accuracy and requires stiff strings or a very high tension to provide impact stability. But that reduces power and pocketing, which in turn reduces spin.
(3) Open strings require stiff and thick poly strings or thick (1.40mm or more) nylon strings for durability, but these strings inhibit spin and are low-powered as well.
Professional players who use the PS95s like Dolgopolov or Dimitrov (link) focus on control and spin. It is rumoured they lead up their swingweights to 360+ kg/cm² so power is a non-issue. Neither is durability relevant since they restring so often.
But what about mere mortals like Z and I? How do we balance the traditional stringing variables of comfort, spin, control, power and durability?
Something must be sacrificed. For the premium price paid for this "heavy spin" model, and with marketing targeted at "spin chasers", spin cannot be compromised.
Power and control are already lacking, and Z absolutely loved the comfort of synthetic gut. So what could we achieve by sacrificing durability alone?
See the dilemma now?
After some deliberation, I decided to increase both swingweight and total weight to add power, ball pocketing, stability and also "stiffen" the dynamic flex of the racket.
Once the low swingweight and flex problem can be dismissed, stringing would be a little easier. Moreover, I felt a heavier racket could improve Z's timing, considering how fast, strong and fit he is.
After calculating the desired numbers, the previous 6 grams I added was re-positioned. Another 11 grams was added under the butt cap to keep balance at about 31.5cm. Swingweight should now be around 325 kg/cm2 and total weight about 345 grams.
Still being new to this 16x15 string pattern, I aligned the PS95s on top of my ProStaff Classic to understand just how open it was.
The above picture had some parallax error. So I took two closer snapshots from directly on top of the head and throat of the rackets.
Both the first and last cross string of the PS95s are about 1cm nearer the centre of the stringbed than the ProStaff Classic.
Total distance from first cross to last is 24cm for the PS95s and 26cm for the ProStaff Classic. So it seems quite evident, that the open strings are not really THAT open after all.
After establishing that, I decided to use Z's favourite syn gut again. To minimise the string variables so that we can better feel the effects of the weight modifications, I strung using the same modified proportional stringing as before.
Let's see how this would turn out...
Playtest:
- Z's first comments were "I can feel the pocketing and bite". I could see he was very comfortable with syn gut.
- However, the added weight slowed down his swing prep and timing. From my side, I could see he was late in hitting for a lot of balls.
- When he got the timing right, both power and spin came across strongly, especially those ankle-high fast-skidding @#$%^&* unreturnable backhand slices.
- Getting the ideal swingweight and total weight takes several sessions. I advised him to move the lead around and keep trying.
- For the few shots I hit, both spin and power increased significantly from previous setups due to the extra pocketing from the added weight.
- Feel wise, the racket is getting very close to how a traditional ProStaff usually feels like.
- The hoop also seemed to flex less and was a little more stable on off-centre hits.
- String movement was minimal but ball fur adorns the stringbed after playing, as usual, showing how much the strings were biting...
The Head Prestige line has a long history. It was targeted at better player who prefer a heavy and stable racket with impeccable feel.
I strung and played with two Head Prestiges for a friend recently, and he asked if I could post some of my views on this blog.
Head Youtek IG Prestige Mid (link)
The grommets of this racket are capped. It is aesthetically pleasing, but makes stringing a little more challenging with the blocked views of where the holes are.
Before stringing, I wondered how to deal with blocked holes. After some thought, I threaded the outer crosses before tensioning the outer mains so that no holes would be blocked later.
Head Graphene Prestige Rev Pro (link)
Likewise, the crosses were threaded first to avoid the blocked hole.
Playtest:
Prestige Mid
- This racket played very traditional to the Prestige Line.
- Weight was hefty and de-polarized. With the weight quite evenly distributed, I could feel some "resistance" near the throat when swinging.
- Stability was good and comfort even better!
- Although the published stiffness states RA63, it felt much more softer and flexier, especially in the hoop.
- After a few hits with this syn gut strung racket, I felt that a stiffer string or a higher tension should have been used to "tighten" the hoop flex to improve accuracy.
- Power was very low, perhaps worsened by the hoop flex.
- Adding lead tape came to mind immediately, until I realised stock weight was already almost 350g, so there was not that much room to customise.
Prestige Rev Pro
- When I took an "air swing", the first impression was how light and fast this racket was.
- The weight is definitely polarized. So much that the throat felt a little hollow, but it was very fast and super easy to swing. So much so, that my partner kept contacting the ball way too early!
- Despite the open pattern, power was very low. In fact, I felt it was even lower than the Prestige Mid. I cannot understand how the swingweight of this can be 329 kg/cm2 whereas the Prestige Mid's was 317 kg/cm2.
- Flex and comfort felt the same as the Mid.
- Out of curiousity, I taped a 11 grams piece of lead right at 12 o'clock to beef up the power. That brought the swingweight up by about 36 kg/cm2 to a tour pro level of 365 kg/cm2.
- After adding the lead, the stringbed came to life! Power and ball pocketing increased, the racket flexed less and more spin could be generated.
- Surprisingly, even at this ridiculously high level of swingweight, neither my partner nor myself felt that the racket wielded too heavily.
- Another observation was that this racket seemed to play better hitting flat shots. Both with and without the added lead, steep swipes to try to generate more spin yielded poor to average results. Ironically, it was the flatter strokes that threw up more spin. Strange!
- The advantage of this Rev Pro, is the light and polarized weight, offering plenty of room to add lead customisations.
- However, the signature feel of the Prestige line has been completely forsaken. This played totally different from the Mid.
