So, let's see if I can do this subject justice.
The concept of "better", in regards to a "blade that would be better for YOU," still actually needs a context.
Is the context, what will give you the fastest shots? Or, what will give the most spin? Or, what will give you the best balance between spin and speed? Or, what will help you to win the most games now, today? OR, what will ultimately help you develop to the highest level in the long run, say, 4-5 years down the line?
If the fastest blade was the priority, then a blade like a Schlager Carbon would be ideal.
If, winning games right now, and/or best balance between speed and spin was the priority than a JM ZLC or an Apolonia blade might be what you want.
But if your concern is being at as high a level as possible 5 years from now, then the Acoustic or the Tenor just may be better for you.
Why? Well, it is a little slower. It doesn't have carbon. And it is a great blade for any level player as demonstrated by Ma Long using one through most of his under 18 career. That is worth repeating. Ma Long used that blade for his young career as he was developing.
Okay, so, let's see if I can explain why that was such an intelligent choice for Ma Long.
When baseball players wait in the on deck circle getting ready to bat, they put a weight called a doughnut on the end of the bat to make it heavier. Then when they swing for real the bat feels lighter and they can put more power into their swing.
The analogy is not completely parallel. I am saying that using a slightly slower 5 ply would blade with flex would, over the next several years cause you to top out at your peak level at a higher level.
The reason: carbon does a lot of the work for you so it makes it so your stroke does not have to be as good, so your timing doesn't have to be as precise, so your contact does not have to be so precise. And the tendency with that scenario is for people to accept good enough technique and this scenario does slow the development of power from the hips, legs and core, timing and precision contact; because with acarbon blade, the technique is "good enough". But with a wood blade you would still feel the room for improvement, your, your nervous system would register the need for better timing, better contact, more power from the hips, legs and core so you would develop those things to a higher level.
The Acoustic or the Tenor will make you need to work a little harder and be a little more precise. In the short term, it will feel like you are working harder. In the long term you will be rewarded with higher level technique.
In the end, it would be your choice. The Apolonia is a great choice for the short term, for having fun, for hitting the ball harder when less effort. You still would be able to get to a very high level with that blade. And if you were to get to a level like top 200, it wouldn't stop you from that.
But the Acoustic or the Tenor may get your technique a shade higher in the long run.
So it depends on what context you are thinking from, when you decide which blade would be "better" for you. I hope that makes sense.
Sent from the Subterranean Workshop by Telepathy