I just bought a V8 to try out for a few months. Have been playing with the Ezone 98 for a year now and still missing the power & control in my game that I like.
@@RedesignYourLifeNow Yonex builds the BEST racquets! Play for 30 years this brand. (Until 2. League Germany) The best was the RDTI 70 98 long. Since I still had frames left I play today again with it.... ( Big Banger 1,25 28kg L+Q ..yes,yes )
This is so good, thank you for doing this video. Please make this a regular feature type video! I was considering this racquet and it had some very timely info in it.
Michelle....2 questions: 1. Is this the regular blade 98 or the blade PRO you can get only thru Wilson? 2. Did you add any lead tape/weight to the racket? Awesome hitting btw
Did you have a Blade 100 for her to test? It got a lot of praise from Tennisnerd and Henrik Wallensten. Seems to be a bit of a sleeper racket, that isn't really mentioned much.
Can you share the full set up please? 2:44 your video cuts out Michelle saying what string. Later you say it’s Luxilon Adrenaline. Adrenaline standard, Adrenaline rough? 51lbs… what string gauge? Thanks.
Has Michelle tried the Wilson Shift 99? It's an amazing racket! More power, more control, more forgiving, more spin, better feel, similar stability of Blade 98.
Does she have a reason why she picked the Blade vs the ProStaff X? On a separate note, I also struggled with arm/shoulder pain with the Blade. Not with the ProStaff 97 V13 and not with the PS X
Absolutely agree with you! It actually really helped my own recreational level backhand just watching hers. She really steps into it and doesn't over rotate. Great shot indeed:)
Appreciate the video and michele is very open and honest and summed up the rackets nicely but i dont really understand why a player of her standard isnt playing with prostock rackets like the H22. It cannot be cost. Maybe it is availability? At this level surely its about customisation and making small adjustments and again im not sure how high level players choices translate to the rest of us in that the sheer amount of hitting hard and the hours on the court creates a whole different game in terms of managing the wear and tear on the body. I am always surprised at how different rackets and stings feel but at a rec level its super rare that the racket has an affect on play as they are all incredibly forgiving. I think when you play at a higher level when you are dealing with a much heavier ball stability becomes an obvious plus and likewise being able to put away shots and im not really sure what magic ingredient helps with that apart from practice and i think thats the real difference. Another issue which I sometimes hear but would be great to get micheles take or you as a retailer is how players at her level deal with the crazy variation in racket specs of the same model. I have three gravity pros and they have a 20g span in weight but all same balance. Im not expert with lead so Its the main reason why i am considering a prostock version. Clearly i have too much time on my hands but ordering rackets on demo and checking stock weights before buying is just too time consuming and for the extra money why not get something that is balls on accurate in terms of specs. If it drives me mad i can’t imagine how frustrating it is for players at micheles level who want consistency from their rackets. Btw before anyone suggests adding weight in the grip etc or use lead its really not that easy to match the rackets that way unless you go to a pro shop. And yes its super obvious the difference in how each racket plays so differently from the same model when there is a 10g jump between each of the three gravity pros i have. Meanwhile thanks for the content and supporting young players.
Are you sure? It's readily available at the moment in different variants on their official homepage, with no mention of it being discontinued. Several shops in my country also stock it.
I’m happy for the female players getting more attention today as the men’s game is a bore fest. but these new rackets are so artificial. It’s just More artificial giant rackets and Artificial strings. Artificially hitting the ball for the player. Top spin, control and power handed right to the player. No need to possess the talent yourself. Just let the racket provide it to the player. Where the past generation players had to develop those skills and possess the talent that’s not necessary anymore. If todays players used the equipment from previous generations they could not hit 75% of the shots they are hitting today using the fake technology. Todays tennis is boring. There is no serve and volley, no drop shots, no net volley. There is no midcourt volleys, there is is no 1 handed backhand. Everything is artificial, Everything is given to you. Everything is happening behind the baseline, and everyone uses the inferior 2 hand backhand which is used by those who do not have the athletic skill and talent to use the 1 handed backhand. Todays tennis is an illusion. Where are the personalities. They are all robotic. If you think I’m wrong ask them to play with traditional equipment and see how their game collapses. Over half the players today would not be on the ATP tour if they had to use traditional equipment. This new technology is marketed for those who do not have ability so it should never have been allowed into the ATP.
Its a fact that progress happens, and if rackets provide more to the user, then its going to be used by every player to try and get an edge over the competition. I'm a 1hbh player, but I can recognise that when young kids are first learning to play, they just dont have the strength to hit a top spin BH, so they invariably start with a 2hbh. Some switch later after they learn to hit the 1h slice BH, but it's just not that common. Look at the top 100. How many are 1hbh? If it was the better (more versatile) shot, the competitive players would use it. You can have a bee in your bonnet as much as you like about modern rackets. No one cares.
It's very conflicting with you because you are on a lot of the comments sections of various tennis channels I happen to watch also and you speak a lot of truth tbh but also your attitude towards tennis has me thinking why do you bother commenting still if you loathe it so much? why do you still watch? Are you not a coach, can't you just teach the classic technique you adore so much? The racquets are not an issue more so the issue is development of the player starting with todays racquets. If the current pros (lets say top 500) all started off heavy wood racquets with natural gut strings then progressed to a modern racquet today that suited them as the previous and current champions did (excluding Thiem, Medvedev and Alcaraz) a lot of the professionals would have better display of their intangibles (drop shots, deft touch, slice, volleys, net game etc.). Starting with a a poly (even if it's a soft one) only rewards hard ball striking, unworthy fake flick-of-the-wrist dependant spin which means your technique moulds according to that type of string. And modern racquets aren't as helpful as you might think rather they mute the feel too much which is what is the real killer and by doing so you don't really understand the string to ball feedback which is crucial for Sampras/Edberg/Rafter-like touch and feel. Which is why regardless of racquet the big three and the generations before could all adapt their game different because the equipment they used growing up forced them to understand what was being done to the ball not just crunching it back in every time like today. They progressed with racquets which add confidence to pull off their game to the most critical degree but doesn't take away their court IQ/awareness and feel etc. and has made watching their matchups brilliant so I would not lay blame totally on "modern racquets and strings" just the order in which equipment is used in development might screw up a players overall ceiling to pull of more options than blasting the ball. New racquets today are artificial yes maybe but the pros usually use a model off 90s or 00s so there's nothing new being used tbh. I'm not sure about the "artificial giant racquets" what do you mean by this? Also there is no artificial way to hit the ball only good technique and bad technique. Also not every racquet manufactured after the 80's is fake, you could use Babolat Pure Drive 2nd generation from 1998 and that one is one of the few unique Babolats made as Babolat did not stuff it with all the vibration dampening and technology as they do today unfortunately, that one was just a plain thick beam power racquet with graphite/kevlar (same material as your beloved Pro Staff 85) would you call that Babolat fake? That Babolat has a notoriously smaller sweet spot compared to ones today because if you hit outside centre (remember the racquet is 100sq inches so the room for making errors outside centre is increased now) since the twist weight was low it would move horribly in your hand for mishitting really unforgiving so the aim with the earlier pure drives was to literally aim either dead centre and you get the playability you wanted which is a far cry from today's pure drives as they rewards you for flick of the wrist cheap shitty academy level spin that Sampras and Nadal would laugh at and that's due to a more muted forgiving string bed so you can get away with a mindless mishit (fuck technology for that). "Top spin, control and power handed right to the player. No need to possess the talent yourself." Yes, I do agree to an extent every racquet today would fall under this statement but not the racquet's a little far back like the 90's and early 00's. Every brand has a racquet line where they decided to flood their racquets with bullshit tech so yeah but there was a point where those racquet's were in their purest form played to bring excellence, skill and talent out of the player and not the other way around unlike today. 2 Handed backhand is not inferior, it is the least stressed shot to execute technically properly and by far the easiest to screw up hence why whenever someone has a good one handed backhand it's never a shitty half assed stiff backhand because the difficulty in using the 1 handed backhand is so superficial, it's either you technically get the shot right or you don't use it at all because you aren't good enough. 2 handed backhand is so accessible it can get so screwed up to even the ATP top 10 level some pros like Berrettini have such a stiff technically incorrect 2 handed backhand they just flick. The proper way to technically hit a 2 handed has gone out of the window with few proponents like Djokovic, Murray, Zverev, Agassi, Davydenko, Safin, Soderling, Nishikori and Nalbandian can actually hit the 2 hander displaying the proper mechanics for it and not half-assing/swinging for the fences like Auger-Alliassime. You look at the one handers today and look how none of them despite what their ranking may be have a fault in their one hander Wawrinka, Dimitrov, Shapovalov, Musetti and Altmaier. To hit it at their level needs a clean contact, timing and as you mentioned skills and talent as a pre-requisite. But to say it doesn't exist for the 2 hander shows not just you but a lot of people don't bother observing that technique properly (and given todays crop of bad 2 handers I can't blame you). Asking pros to play with traditional equipment would only rule out those with crappy technique (like you said wristy fake forehands, shitty academy level spin not real heavy spin like Sampras serve and Nadal forehand where the forearm should be prominent not isolating the wrist, excessive racquet head lag/flip that's totally unnecessary for the groundstrokes and lack of drop shots, volleys, deft touch etc.) so those with good technique and fundamentals would only need to adapt and would be fine. I think people overestimate how bad someone will be with a wooden racquet (I know since I have a Don Budge lying around).
@@luffy-senpai9089 I would have to read your comment later. I am pushing for banning of this artificial technology in tennis. It does not belong in the pros. Moms and dads and seniors that’s fine. But allowing this technology into the pro game would be the same if MLB allowed composite materials into baseball. Everyone would be hitting 500 foot HR’s. It would destroy all the records and eliminate those who made the game. Same with the NFL. a football has to stay a football. A baseball bat has to stay a baseball bat. You need to exhibit the talent based on your ability. Assistance of any kind is a handicap. It has to be stopped. You don’t know anymore who is really talented and who is not. If they used traditional equipment the really talented would be able to create the shots themself and one can tell who is really skilled. Now that is impossible as the technology is giving it to all of them. Hence there are so many players who do not belong in the pros. If a MLB player cannot hit with the traditional wood bat and has trouble getting a hit they don’t make the team. Then give that same player a light composite bat and if he hits .380 and hits HR’s well then you have to assume he’s only hitting well and far because of the technology in the bat.
@@bigrobsydney advanced technology should NEVER enter the picture when it comes to sports. Sports is based on individual born talent. Excelling above others based on talent. Putting technology in their hands takes that away. Advanced technology great for cars planes trains automation engineering electric cars etc etc. it’s not a sport anymore if you hand advanced technology to a player as that advanced technology is doing the work they should have develop themself. It’s like putting engines on running shoes and allowing the sprinter to run 30 mph and win the Olympic gold. It cannot be done. He has to win the race using just his body and his training techniques. It’s no longer a sport when you allow artificial technology into the sport. Babe Ruth is a household name for a reason. He used a wooden bat and nothing else it was just him and his talent.
Blade v8 16x19 Lux Adrenaline 1.25 51lb (23kg)
I just bought a V8 to try out for a few months.
Have been playing with the Ezone 98 for a year now and still missing the power & control in my game that I like.
@@RedesignYourLifeNow Yonex builds the BEST racquets!
Play for 30 years this brand. (Until 2. League Germany) The best was the RDTI 70 98 long.
Since I still had frames left I play today again with it.... ( Big Banger 1,25 28kg L+Q ..yes,yes )
Luxilon and comfortable?
How is you experience with Blade ? I before play with Blade and now switch to Ezone 98@@RedesignYourLifeNow
My go to, but 52 pounds.
This is so good, thank you for doing this video. Please make this a regular feature type video! I was considering this racquet and it had some very timely info in it.
Many thanks!
Michelle....2 questions: 1. Is this the regular blade 98 or the blade PRO you can get only thru Wilson? 2. Did you add any lead tape/weight to the racket? Awesome hitting btw
It's absolutely fabulous just how nicely Michelle expresses herself, so smart and concise. Her tennis is also fabulous 👍
She's brilliant!
Did you have a Blade 100 for her to test? It got a lot of praise from Tennisnerd and Henrik Wallensten. Seems to be a bit of a sleeper racket, that isn't really mentioned much.
Can you share the full set up please? 2:44 your video cuts out Michelle saying what string. Later you say it’s Luxilon Adrenaline. Adrenaline standard, Adrenaline rough? 51lbs… what string gauge? Thanks.
standard adrenaline 51lbs
Has Michelle tried the Wilson Shift 99? It's an amazing racket! More power, more control, more forgiving, more spin, better feel, similar stability of Blade 98.
Michelle is so cute😊
Rematch against Josh please
We like Michelle and her new racket 🤣🤣💖💖
Does she have a reason why she picked the Blade vs the ProStaff X?
On a separate note, I also struggled with arm/shoulder pain with the Blade. Not with the ProStaff 97 V13 and not with the PS X
Blades a better weight for her. Easy to use than a pro staff imo
Please do more videos like this. Esp with Michelle. Pls do videos on strings too
Such a nice game from Michelle
Did sheraag switch to the pro staff?
Love your channel
Appreciate you!
So she's using the 16x19 stock? No customization/lead added at all? Thanks!
Yep exactly stock
still playing the version 7, is it a big difference to v8?
So what racket is it? Wilson Blade 98?m
Funny Lux Adrenaline is stiffer than Yonex PTP according to Tennis Warehouse. Does 1 pound (52 to 51) make a noticeable difference?
I agree that Yonex PTP is not stiff. That's why I recommended it to her. We will never try to alter a players feedback, however!
I like the 18x20 . Still has spin and more control. But its preference.
Both r excellent imho
More Michelle's videos please. She's lovely and a perfect tennis partner.
blade 98 v8 is 1 of the best
Amazing 2 hand backhand
Absolutely agree with you! It actually really helped my own recreational level backhand just watching hers. She really steps into it and doesn't over rotate. Great shot indeed:)
Have you guys tried some lead tape with this racquet?
Yes, Michelles is happy with stock 305 weight however
Great racket!
I’m just shocked that Josh was able to have a rally over 3 shots
Glad to see Michelle switching to the GOAT racquet hhh
Retail Blade? Not Blade pro/h22?
Yep completely stock too
In my opinion the person holding Michelle is best
Appreciate the video and michele is very open and honest and summed up the rackets nicely but i dont really understand why a player of her standard isnt playing with prostock rackets like the H22. It cannot be cost. Maybe it is availability? At this level surely its about customisation and making small adjustments and again im not sure how high level players choices translate to the rest of us in that the sheer amount of hitting hard and the hours on the court creates a whole different game in terms of managing the wear and tear on the body. I am always surprised at how different rackets and stings feel but at a rec level its super rare that the racket has an affect on play as they are all incredibly forgiving. I think when you play at a higher level when you are dealing with a much heavier ball stability becomes an obvious plus and likewise being able to put away shots and im not really sure what magic ingredient helps with that apart from practice and i think thats the real difference. Another issue which I sometimes hear but would be great to get micheles take or you as a retailer is how players at her level deal with the crazy variation in racket specs of the same model. I have three gravity pros and they have a 20g span in weight but all same balance. Im not expert with lead so Its the main reason why i am considering a prostock version. Clearly i have too much time on my hands but ordering rackets on demo and checking stock weights before buying is just too time consuming and for the extra money why not get something that is balls on accurate in terms of specs. If it drives me mad i can’t imagine how frustrating it is for players at micheles level who want consistency from their rackets. Btw before anyone suggests adding weight in the grip etc or use lead its really not that easy to match the rackets that way unless you go to a pro shop. And yes its super obvious the difference in how each racket plays so differently from the same model when there is a 10g jump between each of the three gravity pros i have. Meanwhile thanks for the content and supporting young players.
You spent more time typing this comment than practicing tennis lol
Ok and why did you edit out the string that she switched to?
luxilon adrenaline - someone sliding on the court which would of been super painful with people with earphones
@@allthingstennis thanks! Never used Lux Adrenaline. I’ll try it if it’s a softer poly. Currently use YTex Pro Tour blue 1.25
@@chuckfriebe843 YTEX is great, I'd stick with that as adrenaline is discontinued
@@allthingstennis ☹️
How does she affoed the tour
They should just rename this channel "Michelle Plays Tennis" and their subscriber numbers would increase 10 fold.
❤️
I can give my Rossignol F200 carbon if it helps...
Please dont tell me another solinco. 😅
🤣 TBF Solincos deserve some recognition! The blade is as gorgeous looking as it plays!
@@allthingstennis Haha, solinco has so much heat atm. But yeah they must be pretty good. Would you guys be reviewing the new Yonex Percept soon?
What's her itf profile
More importantly, what's her OnlyFans?
Bad news for Michelle, Luxilon don’t produce the Adrenaline any more.
Are you sure? It's readily available at the moment in different variants on their official homepage, with no mention of it being discontinued. Several shops in my country also stock it.
I’m happy for the female players getting more attention today as the men’s game is a bore fest. but these new rackets are so artificial. It’s just More artificial giant rackets and Artificial strings. Artificially hitting the ball for the player. Top spin, control and power handed right to the player. No need to possess the talent yourself. Just let the racket provide it to the player. Where the past generation players had to develop those skills and possess the talent that’s not necessary anymore. If todays players used the equipment from previous generations they could not hit 75% of the shots they are hitting today using the fake technology. Todays tennis is boring. There is no serve and volley, no drop shots, no net volley. There is no midcourt volleys, there is is no 1 handed backhand. Everything is artificial, Everything is given to you. Everything is happening behind the baseline, and everyone uses the inferior 2 hand backhand which is used by those who do not have the athletic skill and talent to use the 1 handed backhand. Todays tennis is an illusion. Where are the personalities. They are all robotic. If you think I’m wrong ask them to play with traditional equipment and see how their game collapses. Over half the players today would not be on the ATP tour if they had to use traditional equipment. This new technology is marketed for those who do not have ability so it should never have been allowed into the ATP.
Its a fact that progress happens, and if rackets provide more to the user, then its going to be used by every player to try and get an edge over the competition. I'm a 1hbh player, but I can recognise that when young kids are first learning to play, they just dont have the strength to hit a top spin BH, so they invariably start with a 2hbh. Some switch later after they learn to hit the 1h slice BH, but it's just not that common. Look at the top 100. How many are 1hbh? If it was the better (more versatile) shot, the competitive players would use it.
You can have a bee in your bonnet as much as you like about modern rackets. No one cares.
It's very conflicting with you because you are on a lot of the comments sections of various tennis channels I happen to watch also and you speak a lot of truth tbh but also your attitude towards tennis has me thinking why do you bother commenting still if you loathe it so much? why do you still watch? Are you not a coach, can't you just teach the classic technique you adore so much?
The racquets are not an issue more so the issue is development of the player starting with todays racquets. If the current pros (lets say top 500) all started off heavy wood racquets with natural gut strings then progressed to a modern racquet today that suited them as the previous and current champions did (excluding Thiem, Medvedev and Alcaraz) a lot of the professionals would have better display of their intangibles (drop shots, deft touch, slice, volleys, net game etc.). Starting with a a poly (even if it's a soft one) only rewards hard ball striking, unworthy fake flick-of-the-wrist dependant spin which means your technique moulds according to that type of string. And modern racquets aren't as helpful as you might think rather they mute the feel too much which is what is the real killer and by doing so you don't really understand the string to ball feedback which is crucial for Sampras/Edberg/Rafter-like touch and feel. Which is why regardless of racquet the big three and the generations before could all adapt their game different because the equipment they used growing up forced them to understand what was being done to the ball not just crunching it back in every time like today. They progressed with racquets which add confidence to pull off their game to the most critical degree but doesn't take away their court IQ/awareness and feel etc. and has made watching their matchups brilliant so I would not lay blame totally on "modern racquets and strings" just the order in which equipment is used in development might screw up a players overall ceiling to pull of more options than blasting the ball.
New racquets today are artificial yes maybe but the pros usually use a model off 90s or 00s so there's nothing new being used tbh. I'm not sure about the "artificial giant racquets" what do you mean by this? Also there is no artificial way to hit the ball only good technique and bad technique. Also not every racquet manufactured after the 80's is fake, you could use Babolat Pure Drive 2nd generation from 1998 and that one is one of the few unique Babolats made as Babolat did not stuff it with all the vibration dampening and technology as they do today unfortunately, that one was just a plain thick beam power racquet with graphite/kevlar (same material as your beloved Pro Staff 85) would you call that Babolat fake? That Babolat has a notoriously smaller sweet spot compared to ones today because if you hit outside centre (remember the racquet is 100sq inches so the room for making errors outside centre is increased now) since the twist weight was low it would move horribly in your hand for mishitting really unforgiving so the aim with the earlier pure drives was to literally aim either dead centre and you get the playability you wanted which is a far cry from today's pure drives as they rewards you for flick of the wrist cheap shitty academy level spin that Sampras and Nadal would laugh at and that's due to a more muted forgiving string bed so you can get away with a mindless mishit (fuck technology for that). "Top spin, control and power handed right to the player. No need to possess the talent yourself." Yes, I do agree to an extent every racquet today would fall under this statement but not the racquet's a little far back like the 90's and early 00's. Every brand has a racquet line where they decided to flood their racquets with bullshit tech so yeah but there was a point where those racquet's were in their purest form played to bring excellence, skill and talent out of the player and not the other way around unlike today.
2 Handed backhand is not inferior, it is the least stressed shot to execute technically properly and by far the easiest to screw up hence why whenever someone has a good one handed backhand it's never a shitty half assed stiff backhand because the difficulty in using the 1 handed backhand is so superficial, it's either you technically get the shot right or you don't use it at all because you aren't good enough. 2 handed backhand is so accessible it can get so screwed up to even the ATP top 10 level some pros like Berrettini have such a stiff technically incorrect 2 handed backhand they just flick. The proper way to technically hit a 2 handed has gone out of the window with few proponents like Djokovic, Murray, Zverev, Agassi, Davydenko, Safin, Soderling, Nishikori and Nalbandian can actually hit the 2 hander displaying the proper mechanics for it and not half-assing/swinging for the fences like Auger-Alliassime. You look at the one handers today and look how none of them despite what their ranking may be have a fault in their one hander Wawrinka, Dimitrov, Shapovalov, Musetti and Altmaier. To hit it at their level needs a clean contact, timing and as you mentioned skills and talent as a pre-requisite. But to say it doesn't exist for the 2 hander shows not just you but a lot of people don't bother observing that technique properly (and given todays crop of bad 2 handers I can't blame you).
Asking pros to play with traditional equipment would only rule out those with crappy technique (like you said wristy fake forehands, shitty academy level spin not real heavy spin like Sampras serve and Nadal forehand where the forearm should be prominent not isolating the wrist, excessive racquet head lag/flip that's totally unnecessary for the groundstrokes and lack of drop shots, volleys, deft touch etc.) so those with good technique and fundamentals would only need to adapt and would be fine. I think people overestimate how bad someone will be with a wooden racquet (I know since I have a Don Budge lying around).
@@luffy-senpai9089 I would have to read your comment later. I am pushing for banning of this artificial technology in tennis. It does not belong in the pros. Moms and dads and seniors that’s fine. But allowing this technology into the pro game would be the same if MLB allowed composite materials into baseball. Everyone would be hitting 500 foot HR’s. It would destroy all the records and eliminate those who made the game. Same with the NFL. a football has to stay a football. A baseball bat has to stay a baseball bat. You need to exhibit the talent based on your ability. Assistance of any kind is a handicap. It has to be stopped. You don’t know anymore who is really talented and who is not. If they used traditional equipment the really talented would be able to create the shots themself and one can tell who is really skilled. Now that is impossible as the technology is giving it to all of them. Hence there are so many players who do not belong in the pros. If a MLB player cannot hit with the traditional wood bat and has trouble getting a hit they don’t make the team. Then give that same player a light composite bat and if he hits .380 and hits HR’s well then you have to assume he’s only hitting well and far because of the technology in the bat.
@@bigrobsydney advanced technology should NEVER enter the picture when it comes to sports. Sports is based on individual born talent. Excelling above others based on talent. Putting technology in their hands takes that away. Advanced technology great for cars planes trains automation engineering electric cars etc etc. it’s not a sport anymore if you hand advanced technology to a player as that advanced technology is doing the work they should have develop themself. It’s like putting engines on running shoes and allowing the sprinter to run 30 mph and win the Olympic gold. It cannot be done. He has to win the race using just his body and his training techniques. It’s no longer a sport when you allow artificial technology into the sport. Babe Ruth is a household name for a reason. He used a wooden bat and nothing else it was just him and his talent.
@@TimTheMusicMan Please get back to me once you read my reply.
Everybody knows what I really care about 😳🤌
Oh ok
🍑
Me too
So hot 🥵 🔥