Rackets › Compare

Babolat Counter Viper 2.6 vs Joma Valkiria Flex

Add a racket

The verdict

Choose the Counter Viper 2.6 if you want more control, comfort, handling and forgiveness, the Valkiria Flex if you want more power.

Counter Viper 2.6Highest score
Pick this one for
  • Control+2.5
  • Comfort+1.5
  • Handling+1.0
  • Forgiveness+1.0
Valkiria Flex
Pick this one for
  • Power+1.5

Neither is sold to Netherlands by the shops on padell.io.

Still in doubt? The racket finder checks both against your level, side and arm. Open the racket finder →

How they play

From the Counter Viper 2.6 to the Valkiria Flex: less control, more power, less comfort, less handling, less forgiveness.

Controlless control8.56.0
Powermore power5.06.5
Comfortless comfort5.03.5
Handlingless handling5.04.0
Forgivenessless forgiveness7.56.5

Counter Viper 2.6Valkiria FlexLine = the average of all rackets

Where the specs differ

Launched
2026
Not published
Weight
365 g
350 to 360 g
Balance
Head-heavy according to the brand, 270 mm
Head-heavy according to the brand
Face
3K carbon
Fiberglass and carbon
Core
X-EVA
Black EVA
Thickness
38 mm
Not published
Surface
3D Spin+
Not published
Frame
Carbon
100% carbon
Show all specs (1 the same)
Shape
Round
Round

Reviews and videos

No review site has tested both yet. Reviews of the Counter Viper 2.6: 1. Of the Valkiria Flex: 0.

Often mentioned in video reviews

Counter Viper 2.611 videos
  • Good control 8×
  • Lots of power 6×
  • Large sweet spot 6×
  • Versatile 4×
  • Easy to handle 2×
  • Good at the net 2×
  • Demanding, needs good technique 5×
  • Lacks power 4×
  • Vibration, hard on the arm 3×
  • Harder to handle 3×
  • Head-heavy 2×
  • Little feel 2×
  • Expensive 2×
  • Small sweet spot 2×
Valkiria Flex

No summarised videos yet.

Counter Viper 2.6: reviews and videos →Valkiria Flex: reviews and videos →

Or a third racket in between

adidasCross IT Ctrl

Sits between the two on paper: more power than the Counter Viper 2.6, more control than the Valkiria Flex.

€ 171.50Compare all three →

Was this page useful?