Breakdown

Groundstrokes: 8.3

Being able to hit both string patterns of the Dunlop CX 200 Tour side by side was a treat for our foursome. Both racquets offer loads of feel and control, and Chris really enjoyed the response from both. He began, "With the 16x19 version I found slightly easier access to pace, depth and spin. When hitting the 18x20 I had maximum precision, but I had to work a little harder to put the ball away. In the end, I preferred the easier-to-use 16x19. I was able to maintain depth during point play better, which helped me stay offensive. I had a tendency to drop the occasional ball short with the 18x20, which had me immediately on my back foot from my opponent's attacking play. The one upside for me from the baseline with the 18x20 was how well I was hitting my backhand slice. I found I could hit a heavier and more precise slice with the 18x20 than I could with the 16x19 version."

Both versions of the CX 200 Tour provided a lot of precision, feel and maneuverability for Troy. He said, "The weight and swingweight are very similar between the two, but the 18x20 has a leather grip and 5 more grams built in, which led to it feeling just a bit more solid in stock form. I think adding a leather grip to the 16x19 would make them even more similar in feel. I felt a bit more connected with the 18x20; it felt amazing on my backhand slice and gave me a ton of confidence when hitting flatter drive shots because it provided great predictability. With the 16x19, it was easier to shape the ball and generate heavy topspin, as well as go for those cross-court dipping angles. I felt pretty comfortable on the slice and driving through flatter shots with the 16x19. For me, the 16x19 was just a bit more versatile. I think with a leather grip and a bit of weight in the hoop, the feel would be more solid and more to my liking."

"To be transparent, these racquets don't always line up with what I like because they are flexible, have a thin beam and can be lower powered," said Michelle. "But I went into this playtest without taking a look at the specs and I’m glad I did because I have a habit of seeing certain numbers and not being interested in what the racquet has to offer. I first hit with the 18x20, and after an hour or so I was shocked at how much fun I was having; it felt a lot lighter and less stiff than I'd expected. My biggest complaint was the leather grip was a bit slippery and needed an overgrip on top. I think I loved it so much because the racquet felt really stable at contact and allowed me to swing out. The CX 200 Tour 18x20 absorbed the shock and flowed effortlessly through the ball, rewarding a lengthy big-stroke style. I was effortlessly hitting the back two feet of the court while keeping the ball low and penetrating. It was also maneuverable enough to angle balls off the court. Now, I don't think anyone really needs a 95-square-inch frame, yet this racquet felt forgiving. And with that being said, the 16x19 version of this racquet felt like a very forgiving head size and sweetspot. The response felt a bit more muted to me compared to the 18x20, and because of that I felt a bit lost at times. It was fun and easy to swing, but I noticed the lower swingweight even more and was ahead of my swing more often than not. I believe this would be a better fit with some weight added to the tip."

For Mark, it didn’t matter which of the two CX 200 Tours he played with from the baseline because both helped keep his opponents off balance with their great directional control. He described, "Although shot depth required more effort with the 18x20 version, both were pretty easy to gauge shot depth with. Topspin was easier to generate with the 16x19, but slightly higher scores go to the 18x20 for supplying a very connected feel to my groundstrokes, and my backhand slice felt more natural with it."

Volleys: 8.4

Our team could be effective with either version of the CX 200 Tour when taking the net. It was pretty close between the two string patterns for Troy, though he came away with a slight preference for the 18x20. He said, "I found a lot of feel for the ball and could be really precise with my volleys. With my groundstrokes, I favored the 16x19 pattern because it was more versatile and spin-friendly. I hardly ever use topspin on volleys (other than the occasional swinging volley), so I ended up preferring the 18x20 when it came to crashing the net. It felt more solid and stable, and a bit crisper. The leather grip on the 18x20 gave added feel to the beveled edges of the grip, and the tighter stringbed made me feel more connected to the ball when placing my volleys in the corners of the court."

Michelle also noted that both racquets felt great at net. She said, "The 18x20 felt more controlled and precise, but both were incredibly maneuverable and easy to use at the net, and I didn't note any major stability issues. Again, 95 square inches felt forgiving."

By a small margin, this was one part of the playtest where Mark felt that the 16x19 eclipsed the 18x20. He said, "Between its lighter strung weight and more open string pattern, I was able to consistently hit more effective volleys with the 16x19, especially if I was caught off guard."

"Both CX 200 Tours felt great at net," added Chris. "My volleys felt accurate with both racquets. The 18x20 version offered a more controlled response, but control was still very impressive with the 16x19. The 16x19 version felt especially plush at contact. The sweetspot felt forgiving, and I liked the controlled launch off the stringbed. With the 18x20 version, the response felt a little firmer due to the dense stringbed. I was very confident that I would hit my targets and really enjoyed the response of that version too."

Serves: 8.2

When starting points, the CX 200 Tour 16x19 edged out the 18x20 on both first and second serves. Mark explained, "As much as I enjoyed the extra mass of the 18x20, if the string was not edgy or thin, It was a challenge to get the ball to dip into the service box. On the other hand, the 16x19 made it easy to shape my serve with spin while still maintaining decent pace."

In tight situations, Michelle noted a lack of access to spin on serves with the 18x20, but she loved hitting kick second serves with the 16x19. She continued, "It was a bit weird because I don't think I ever really enjoy hitting second serves! I could really feel the racquet getting up and through the ball and could see the movement off the stringbed. The 18x20 felt lower powered but was fun to hit big with and for hitting slices wide."

For Chris, both the 16x19 and the 18x20 felt easy to swing on serve. He said, "The CS 200 Tours had a nice head-light feel, which gave me the sense that both were easy to whip through contact, and I was able to generate solid pace with both. I was very happy with my control with the CX 200 Tour 18x20. I felt like I was serving as accurately as I could, which allowed me to be aggressive on both first and second serves. When using the 16x19 version I found a little more pace and spin, which also lent itself to confident serving."

When it comes to serving, Troy can generate a decent amount of power when needed, but he considers his strong point to be his spin. He said, "I found it easy to generate racquet speed with these Dunlop CX 200 Tours due to their swingweights being lower than what I typically play with. I was able to generate a lot of spin on my serves with both racquets because of how whippy they felt, but it was even more noticeable with the CX 200 Tour 16x19. Both racquets allowed me to place the ball with precision. My favorite serve to hit was the kick serve out wide on the deuce side (lefty server)."

Returns: 8.1

While both versions of the CX 200 Tour could handle the return game for our playtest team, the tighter of the two string patterns seemed to edge out the more open one. Michelle explained, "The 18x20 gets my pick here as I often mention this is probably the part of my game that should always be treated with a more controlled racquet. I could hit out and found the CX 200 Tour 18x20 to be stable and precise, and it was fun to unleash big returns." 

Troy found maneuverability to be a positive feature of both racquets. He said, "I was able to swing with ease, and I could easily use some wrist action to help me get the ball back when I was in a defensive return position. I typically prefer a heftier racquet on returns to help plow through the ball and push it deep, and I had a slight preference for the CX 200 Tour 18x20. It felt more solid and stable when facing hard-hitting servers, maybe because it is 5 grams heavier and there is a leather grip on the racquet. Both racquets offer a lot of control and feel, but the 18x20 felt more precise and connected on my slice backhand returns, as well as the chip lob that I like to use in doubles. I would likely add some weight in the hoop of both racquets to help with plow through and to help drive my returns deep in the court."

After trying both racquets, Mark found that the 18x20 version worked best for his serve returns. He described, "Perhaps it was the extra weight of the 18x20, and the fact that I most often slice my return, but I was afforded better directional control and success with the dense-patterned CX 200 Tour while returning serve."

On the flip side, Chris preferred returning with the CX 200 Tour 16x19. He said, "I found I could swing aggressively, and the more open pattern gave me solid spin with a little more margin for error over the net. The 18x20 version gave me less rotation on my topspin returns, but it was excellent on slice returns. As from the baseline, I was more likely to hit short with the 18x20, which immediately put me on defense."

Breakdown Summary