PDA

View Full Version : Bottom to Top Crosses


Deano
02-11-2009, 04:28 PM
I would like to ask the stringers here how often (Percentage wise) do they see racquets strung one piece from new customers where the crosses are strung bottom to top instead of ATW when the mains end at the throat? Probably 90% of the racquets I get are strung this way regardless of brand. It makes me wonder how critical stringing crosses top to bottom is.
BTW I do use a ATW pattern in these cases if I can't do it 2 piece.

supertrex
02-11-2009, 04:42 PM
some racquets is best to do bottom to top crosses due to the tie knot at the end. The upper part on ( some racquets ) have more space so u can pull the string more to do the knotting. ( less tension loss )

Some racquets on the bottom have no space to pull your string. end up you lossing tension, coz u cant pull the string for the knot.

So it depends on the racquet and the preference of the stringer.

You can do it both ways but sometimes you will lose tension if no space to pull the string.

Example on the LM radical 2 piece cross I have to do starting knot on the bottom and end up on top due to no space at all to pull for tension on the bottom part.

psp2
02-11-2009, 04:52 PM
some racquets is best to do bottom to top crosses due to the tie knot at the end. The upper part on ( some racquets ) have more space so u can pull the string more to do the knotting. ( less tension loss )

Some racquets on the bottom have no space to pull your string. end up you lossing tension, coz u cant pull the string for the knot.

So it depends on the racquet and the preference of the stringer.

You can do it both ways but sometimes you will lose tension if no space to pull the string.

Example on the LM radical 2 piece cross I have to do starting knot on the bottom and end up on top due to no space at all to pull for tension on the bottom part.

Sorry, but the above are some of the dumbest explanations I've read about stringing. There is ALWAYS enough space to pull a string. Why wouldn't there be space for a pull?

As for the OP question... stringing T(hroat) to H(ead) is acceptable by some companies like Wilson. However, stringing T>H does increase stresses on the frame at 10/2 positions, so an ATW or box pattern is used. An argument for the T>H stringing is the ease of stringing.

jim e
02-11-2009, 05:00 PM
Example on the LM radical 2 piece cross I have to do starting knot on the bottom and end up on top due to no space at all to pull for tension on the bottom part.

That makes no sense!
Actually everything you said makes no sense!!!
I have strung a # of LM radicals, as 2 piece and I string them all top to bottom as Head even specifies this for their racquets. There is plenty of space to pull tension , I have no idea what you are talking about! I pull the tension on the last cross just like the other cross strings. I don't know what you are saying on no space.Your stringing from bottom up on a Head, (and a # of others as well)can void the warranty, and if not your racquet, and cust. sends it back I guess you would take responsiblity for not following their specific directions.
To OP:
I string most racquets 2 piece as my preference,(unless mains end at top and will then string as 1 piece), and only a very few would specify 1 or 2 piece,and if 1 piece I always would do an ATW pattern where the mains would end at throat,so crosses are always done top down.
To supertrex: You need to get a USRSA stringers digest and read it well so you will know what you are doing!There is no preference of the stringer to string a Head bottom up as you do.

supertrex
02-11-2009, 06:29 PM
Well I just explain what my thoughts are, and my own experience on stringing. been stringing for 3 months now own raquet. now all of you are entitled whatever you wanna say regarding its offensive or not.

Its not 95% on the bottom that u cant pull string. yes u can still can but more on top.

Maybe helpful or not I dont really care. I just mentioned my 2 cents.

jim e
02-11-2009, 07:05 PM
Well I just explain what my thoughts are, and my own experience on stringing. been stringing for 3 months now own raquet. now all of you are entitled whatever you wanna say regarding its offensive or not.

Its not 95% on the bottom that u cant pull string. yes u can still can but more on top.

Maybe helpful or not I dont really care. I just mentioned my 2 cents.

Well your 2 cents you mention still does not explain why you cannot pull your bottom strings. Your explanation does not compute. You have to pull tension on all strings mains and crosses.Your comment of more on top is ? How about an explanation that we can all understand? Ball is back on your side now!

det3
02-11-2009, 07:11 PM
it makes no difference in my mind if you string top to bottom or bottom to top. i dispute anyone that says otherwise. has there ever been any proof of stringing bottom to top puts more stress on the frame???

how could you ever prove that??

Il Mostro
02-11-2009, 08:25 PM
That makes no sense!
Actually everything you said makes no sense!!!


What else is new?

Tim W
02-11-2009, 10:49 PM
Well I just explain what my thoughts are, and my own experience on stringing. been stringing for 3 months now own raquet. now all of you are entitled whatever you wanna say regarding its offensive or not.

Its not 95% on the bottom that u cant pull string. yes u can still can but more on top.

Maybe helpful or not I dont really care. I just mentioned my 2 cents.

So what you are saying about the first and last crosses being tighter, you are saying that the middle crosses are at the incorrect tension? That is so wrong. It is the same tension on the first/last crosses, it's just shorter so it feels tighter.

The first few and last few crosses, it doesn't matter if there is a small amount of tension loss on them, because you predominantly use the middle of the racquet. Shots off the side of the racquet will feel like crap regardless of the 1 pound tension loss on the first/last cross.

Tim W
02-11-2009, 10:50 PM
it makes no difference in my mind if you string top to bottom or bottom to top. i dispute anyone that says otherwise. has there ever been any proof of stringing bottom to top puts more stress on the frame???

how could you ever prove that??

Because a lot of manufacturers say this is wrong, and it can viod the warranty on a few frames. The throat is the weakest part of the racquet.

jim e
02-12-2009, 06:10 AM
Because a lot of manufacturers say this is wrong, and it can viod the warranty on a few frames. The throat is the weakest part of the racquet.

Tim,you actually have that backwords,The throat is the stronger part, as when you start the crosses at the head in a two-piece pattern, you are working toward the stronger part of the hoop near the throat,as the pressure builds on the frame as the result of installing the crosses . If stringing bottom up,pressure builds up towards the head, and can cause fractures at the 2 oclock, and 10 oclock positions. This is why Head and some other brands recommend 2 piece stringing for their racquets.

In August 2008 issue of RSI mag. Article one piece vs two piece lists the following:
"HEAD requires that every performance racquet they sell must be strung two-piece, period. With a properly-done two-piece string job, you avoid not only having the crosses installed from the throat to the head, but also any potential problem that might occur with an around-the-world or box pattern, where you might have a 90- or 270-degree turn between a main and a cross, which could break through a section of the frame where the grommets are close together. Because of this, in the unlikely event there was a problem with this frame, Head would have the option of denying the warranty claim due to the one-piece string job."
The above came from the USRSA magazine called RSI magazine, and as I said August 1, 2008 issue.
If there are experts here that know different then they should contact the USRSA , along with the racquet manuf.and let them know they are wrong.

There are other manuf. that follow the same protocols as well.I was told that Wilson and Babolat can be strung bottom up, but I don't do it,as to be uniform with all racquets that I do,but that is just me.

Bottom line, to the good people on these boards that are looking for the proper information, just remember to string top down on your crosses and you will be OK. There will be posters here that post what they do not have any knowledge on like this statment by det3 that should be ignored:
it makes no difference in my mind if you string top to bottom or bottom to top. i dispute anyone that says otherwise. has there ever been any proof of stringing bottom to top puts more stress on the frame???

how could you ever prove that??

This person should read the USRSA digest, and know what is proper protocol, that has been published by experts in the field, and racquet manufactures as well.

This makes another good reason for people who need the proper and correct information to join the USRSA, as they have a wealth of proper information online and their comprehensive digest, as well as direct access to speak to a knowledgable technician if a problem arises.

Il Mostro
02-12-2009, 06:33 AM
Here's an interesting tidbit about my Tecnifibre racquet and my conversation with TF. The TFlash 310 has a label around one of the 6T grommets which reads "Tie Off". While this single tie-off spot seems to indicated a one piece throat-up approach, the pattern is specified strictly as a two-piece.

Interestingly enough, the two-piece pattern is only published in the USA and, indeed, the crosses may be strung bottom without risk of damaging the racquet. TF's rationale for the recommendation is their perception that most professional stringers in the USA are using Ektelon/Neos style lockout/two-point mounting systems and there is greater stress placed on the frame with those systems. In Europe, where they believe most of the machines in use by professional stringers are six point CP, they publish bottom up patterns as well as two-piece patterns. Again, this is what TF is saying, not me -- I am not trying to rile up all the 2-point mounting system and lockout guys.

I string both one and two piece on my own TF310's and have had no problems. When stringing for others I go strictly by the book or their specific instructions if the option of one or two piece exists.

The_Question
02-12-2009, 06:53 AM
Maybe helpful or not I dont really care. I just mentioned my 2 cents.

With those 2 sentences, I would never take any advice from you...hey, I'm just sayin'...

uk_skippy
02-12-2009, 08:05 AM
been stringing for 3 months now own raquet. now all of you are entitled whatever you wanna say regarding its offensive or not.

3 months doesn't make you an experienced stringer.

To be honest, I string most rqts 1 piece. If I've taught anyone, it easier to teach them the 2 piece method. Assuming that you've taught (in the loosest sense) yourself the 2 piece method, then any reading matter that you've seen would have lead you to start the crosses from the top downwards, not bottom up. There should be plenty of room to tie-off the crosses at the bottom unless you're not mounting the rqt correctly.

Maybe helpful or not I dont really care. I just mentioned my 2 cents.

There are some people out there who tell players to go and buy a machine so they can string there own rqts, and think that they'll do the job right. Unfortunately, most people like this end end up stringing badly, and can't accept when experience stringers tell them they're doing it wrong.

If you continue to string the rqts bottom up when they should be strung top down whether it be 1 piece ATW, or 2 piece, then 1 day that will come back to haunt you. I just hope its not on a friends or customers rqts.

Enjoying the learning experience of becoming a quality stringer.

Regards

Paul

jim e
02-12-2009, 08:16 AM
Very well said Paul.
I was trying to tell him he was wrong, so others here would know what is correct, as some people post the wrong information here and that discredits the validity of the comments on this site.
Its a nice site here,and for the most part good people here, and its nice to keep it valid on its comments as well.

rich s
02-12-2009, 08:30 AM
.........The throat is the stronger part, as when you start the crosses at the head in a two-piece pattern, you are working toward the stronger part of the hoop near the throat,as the pressure builds on the frame as the result of installing the crosses . If stringing bottom up,pressure builds up towards the head, and can cause fractures at the 2 oclock, and 10 oclock positions. This is why Head and some other brands recommend 2 piece stringing for their racquets.

In August 2008 issue of RSI mag. Article one piece vs two piece lists the following:
"HEAD requires that every performance racquet they sell must be strung two-piece, period. With a properly-done two-piece string job, you avoid not only having the crosses installed from the throat to the head, but also any potential problem that might occur with an around-the-world or box pattern, where you might have a 90- or 270-degree turn between a main and a cross, which could break through a section of the frame where the grommets are close together. Because of this, in the unlikely event there was a problem with this frame, Head would have the option of denying the warranty claim due to the one-piece string job."
The above came from the USRSA magazine called RSI magazine, and as I said August 1, 2008 issue.
If there are experts here that know different then they should contact the USRSA , along with the racquet manuf.and let them know they are wrong.

There are other manuf. that follow the same protocols as well.I was told that Wilson and Babolat can be strung bottom up, but I don't do it,as to be uniform with all racquets that I do,but that is just me.

Bottom line, to the good people on these boards that are looking for the proper information, just remember to string top down on your crosses and you will be OK. There will be posters here that post what they do not have any knowledge on like this statment by det3 that should be ignored:


This person should read the USRSA digest, and know what is proper protocol, that has been published by experts in the field, and racquet manufactures as well.

This makes another good reason for people who need the proper and correct information to join the USRSA, as they have a wealth of proper information online and their comprehensive digest, as well as direct access to speak to a knowledgable technician if a problem arises.

jim e: One of the bests posts and most sound advice I have read in a while on the boards.

Thanks for sharing the text from the RSI article

supertrex: .....a closed mouth gathers no feet.

det3
02-12-2009, 10:51 AM
my point still stands... there is no proof that this is bad for the frame. just because this person says or that person says doesn't convince me. i've strung thousands of racquets and have never ever had an issue. i can see the logic on a two point mounting system, but not on a quality six point machine.

drakulie
02-12-2009, 11:08 AM
Tim,you actually have that backwords,The throat is the stronger part, as when you start the crosses at the head in a two-piece pattern, you are working toward the stronger part of the hoop near the throat,as the pressure builds on the frame as the result of installing the crosses . If stringing bottom up,pressure builds up towards the head, and can cause fractures at the 2 oclock, and 10 oclock positions. This is why Head and some other brands recommend 2 piece stringing for their racquets.

In August 2008 issue of RSI mag. Article one piece vs two piece lists the following:
"HEAD requires that every performance racquet they sell must be strung two-piece, period. With a properly-done two-piece string job, you avoid not only having the crosses installed from the throat to the head, but also any potential problem that might occur with an around-the-world or box pattern, where you might have a 90- or 270-degree turn between a main and a cross, which could break through a section of the frame where the grommets are close together. Because of this, in the unlikely event there was a problem with this frame, Head would have the option of denying the warranty claim due to the one-piece string job."
The above came from the USRSA magazine called RSI magazine, and as I said August 1, 2008 issue.
If there are experts here that know different then they should contact the USRSA , along with the racquet manuf.and let them know they are wrong.

There are other manuf. that follow the same protocols as well.I was told that Wilson and Babolat can be strung bottom up, but I don't do it,as to be uniform with all racquets that I do,but that is just me.

Bottom line, to the good people on these boards that are looking for the proper information, just remember to string top down on your crosses and you will be OK. There will be posters here that post what they do not have any knowledge on like this statment by det3 that should be ignored:


This person should read the USRSA digest, and know what is proper protocol, that has been published by experts in the field, and racquet manufactures as well.

This makes another good reason for people who need the proper and correct information to join the USRSA, as they have a wealth of proper information online and their comprehensive digest, as well as direct access to speak to a knowledgable technician if a problem arises.


jim , great post, and thanks for taking the time to find and post all this info.

One question......

Wilson has been selling frames forever, and by the millions. I would consider them "experts in the field" (as you put it), since they are the ones not only developing, but also manufactruing the frames, and would know what is best>>>> yet, they don't advocate stringing crosses top to bottom.


I understand one logic may be that they sell so many, they simply don't care to replace one that is strung incorrectly, however, I don't buy that argument.

Thoughts???

Anyone???

jim e
02-12-2009, 11:09 AM
my point still stands... there is no proof that this is bad for the frame. just because this person says or that person says doesn't convince me. i've strung thousands of racquets and have never ever had an issue. i can see the logic on a two point mounting system, but not on a quality six point machine.

It is not just this person or that person. Why don't you tell Head, or Yonex, or other racquet companies that their engineers are all wrong, and you know better!Or let the top stringers at the USRSA that are world known on what they do that you know better, and they are all wrong.
Actually the burden of proof is on your shoulders, if you believe the standard of care is not proper. (Usually once something is published in a national publication and universally agreed upon by its peers, it sets the standard of care until someone else can refute it).
People that post here should give accurate information, and not the BS that comes up from time to time, as that hurts the credibility of the site. In otherwords to put it in your terminology that you can understand, stop the BS, and post the facts!

jim e
02-12-2009, 11:14 AM
jim , great post, and thanks for taking the time to find and post all this info.

One question......

Wilson has been selling frames forever, and by the millions. I would consider them "experts in the field" (as you put it), since they are the ones not only developing, but also manufactruing the frames, and would know what is best>>>> yet, they don't advocate stringing crosses top to bottom.


I understand one logic may be that they sell so many, they simply don't care to replace one that is strung incorrectly, however, I don't buy that argument.

Thoughts???

Anyone???
It seems like some stiffer racquets like Wilsons can take it compared to Heads.

A while back R. Parnell had the following to say, that I took off another site.It seems to answer your question. I hope he did not mind me reposting his words:
"Obviously the main reason for stringing top to bottom is the frame distortion factor.Head frames are very flexible in the hoop and thus I tend to string Head frames ATW or 2 piece.I have yet to have a Wilson 6.1 distort with it being strung bottom up so if it doesn't distort why bother.Stringing natural gut bottom to top is another factor to take into consideration as the most used/worked gut will end up in the hitting area.But if you string ATW with gut in a tight pattern the gut suffers as it goes against the weave.Should one only use 2 piece with gut going top to bottom? IMO I think it depends on the frame,pattern and string being used. Have a great one.. ??? "

Hearing things like this makes me feel that you need to take the racquet on an individule case by case, so why not just string all top to bottom, and it is one factor that you do not have to be concerned about!I am certainly no authority on this, and I do not claim to be. I just try to get as much information as possible to make the best choices in decisions to make. It follows stringing and almost everything else you do in life.

I was going to keep off this topic when I 1st viewed it, but the poor responses kept coming and I just had to say something. I really do not want to offend anyone, but at same time I like this site to be credible as well.This is a great site, as years ago, back in the 60's when I started to string, there was no internet, no USRSA, or much of any help with tips, and help that is available here. The starting stringers really do have a great advantage here.

drakulie
02-12-2009, 11:44 AM
^^^jim e, your info and follow-up is much appreciated. Thanks so much. !!!

uk_skippy
02-12-2009, 12:10 PM
my point still stands... there is no proof that this is bad for the frame. just because this person says or that person says doesn't convince me. i've strung thousands of racquets and have never ever had an issue. i can see the logic on a two point mounting system, but not on a quality six point machine.

Then string a Yonex 1 piece bottom up. When it cracks so what response you get from them when you tell you how you strung it.

Stringing patterns are given by the rqt companies for a reason. Those which say that that stringing bottom up, then you're ok to do so. Those which state only string 2 piece means you start the crosses from the top.

Easy.

Regards

Paul

SteveI
02-12-2009, 12:49 PM
It seems like some stiffer racquets like Wilsons can take it compared to Heads.

A while back R. Parnell had the following to say, that I took off another site.It seems to answer your question. I hope he did not mind me reposting his words:
"Obviously the main reason for stringing top to bottom is the frame distortion factor.Head frames are very flexible in the hoop and thus I tend to string Head frames ATW or 2 piece.I have yet to have a Wilson 6.1 distort with it being strung bottom up so if it doesn't distort why bother.Stringing natural gut bottom to top is another factor to take into consideration as the most used/worked gut will end up in the hitting area.But if you string ATW with gut in a tight pattern the gut suffers as it goes against the weave.Should one only use 2 piece with gut going top to bottom? IMO I think it depends on the frame,pattern and string being used. Have a great one.. ??? "

Hearing things like this makes me feel that you need to take the racquet on an individule case by case, so why not just string all top to bottom, and it is one factor that you do not have to be concerned about!I am certainly no authority on this, and I do not claim to be. I just try to get as much information as possible to make the best choices in decisions to make. It follows stringing and almost everything else you do in life.

I was going to keep off this topic when I 1st viewed it, but the poor responses kept coming and I just had to say something. I really do not want to offend anyone, but at same time I like this site to be credible as well.This is a great site, as years ago, back in the 60's when I started to string, there was no internet, no USRSA, or much of any help with tips, and help that is available here. The starting stringers really do have a great advantage here.


Jim,

There is just so much wrong info being posted these days.. it would take a full time person to try to keep up with it all. Keep posting when you see something that is soooooooooo wrong. I am not talking about the old SW debate or light vs heavy frame. Stringing crosses from the bottom up is just wrong in most cases. As stated, there are some companies that ok that method.. most like Head almost never say it is ok. Nothing like snaping a $200.00 frame based on advice from a person that has strung 10 frames.

Nice work,
Steve