PDA

View Full Version : 2 piece required?


dgdawg
10-23-2010, 07:52 AM
O.K...so.....
What do all you experienced stringers do with customers frames, when a 2 piece is required?
1-follow Stringers Digest to the letter.... (2 piece)
2-String 1 piece and do ATW, stringing X's H to T? (Head, etc...)
Some patterns say string X's T to H. I just can't bring myself to do that.

EDIT---__________________________________________________ ________________________________________

I guess my REAL question is:
Are professionals stringing one pcs, when 2 pcs is specified, and just stringing ATW. (H to T)
I always string 1 piece when instructions permit, and string ATW when patterns permit T to H X's.

jim e
10-23-2010, 11:46 AM
O.K...so.....
What do all you experienced stringers do with customers frames, when a 2 piece is required?
1-follow Stringers Digest to the letter.... (2 piece)
2-String 1 piece and do ATW, stringing X's H to T? (Head, etc...)
Some patterns say string X's T to H. I just can't bring myself to do that.

I usually follow "The Stringers Digest".If 2 pc. only listed,I string as 2 pc.
With the # of hybrid jobs, Head specific to string as 2 pc only, and I string a lot of nat. gut, and I prefer to string gut as 2 pc,and to make things consistant with my stringing most of my stringing is 2 pc.
I agree, I string most all H to T. especially since most of my stringing is 2 pc.
Every so often I will string an ATW pattern, just to keep in practice of stringing it, but for the most part, stringing is 2 pc for me, unless the racquet is a natural to string as 1 pc. and no hybrid.

aussie
10-24-2010, 04:49 PM
I always (well mostly) string 2 piece and check out the Klipper website for the pattern (also the Silent Partner website too). Always string crosses top to bottom if at all possible.

MuscleWeave
11-02-2010, 02:02 PM
Delete post.

Irvin
11-02-2010, 02:33 PM
^^ http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=354535

Irvin

onefromcov
11-02-2010, 03:07 PM
My Dunlop MW 200G 95 takes a one piece, crosses bottom to top pattern. Could you make a video on how to do that?



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_TEHKRPtx-g

Irvin
11-02-2010, 03:58 PM
^^ 'onefromcov' something tells me that is not what he is looking for

Irvin

Technatic
11-02-2010, 10:27 PM
The major question in this matter is: For what reason do racquet manufacturers demand 2 piece stringing??
IMO that has to do with bad experiences on with racquets strung from throat to head on machines with indirect (outside) mounting.

The head of the racquet is weaker at the head side than the throat. This means that the pressure on the outside supports at the head side is higher than at the throat.
It is important to lower this pressure as soon as possible and this is done by entering the cross strings form the head, because the crosses pull the frame away from the support.

When the crosses are entered from throat to head the racquet narrows from the throat upwards. Because the deformation of the frame is already smaller at the throatside this enlarges the “conflict” between the lower and the upper part of the racquet head.
This means that the stress in the racquet is “pushed upwards” resulting in higher pressure on the supports at the head side.

I string on a Stringway 5 point direct system and always go from throat to head when the mains end at the throat, never a problem at all!

The reason for this is that there are no outside support that can cause a “point-load” and the frame can divide the pressure gradually over the hole length.

IMO
Going around the world is always as good as 4 knots for the racquet, there is no mechanical difference.
So no reason to drop the warranty.

dgdawg
11-03-2010, 05:25 AM
The major question in this matter is: For what reason do racquet manufacturers demand 2 piece stringing??
IMO that has to do with bad experiences on with racquets strung from throat to head on machines with indirect (outside) mounting.

The head of the racquet is weaker at the head side than the throat. This means that the pressure on the outside supports at the head side is higher than at the throat.
It is important to lower this pressure as soon as possible and this is done by entering the cross strings form the head, because the crosses pull the frame away from the support.

When the crosses are entered from throat to head the racquet narrows from the throat upwards. Because the deformation of the frame is already smaller at the throatside this enlarges the “conflict” between the lower and the upper part of the racquet head.
This means that the stress in the racquet is “pushed upwards” resulting in higher pressure on the supports at the head side.

I string on a Stringway 5 point direct system and always go from throat to head when the mains end at the throat, never a problem at all!

The reason for this is that there are no outside support that can cause a “point-load” and the frame can divide the pressure gradually over the hole length.

IMO
Going around the world is always as good as 4 knots for the racquet, there is no mechanical difference.
So no reason to drop the warranty.

Hmmm...I'm not quite sure how to interpret this...
although this doesn't answer my OP question of "what do experienced stringers do when 2 piece is required", it does give me some insight.
I'm pretty sure Head, Yonex and other "2 piece required" manufactured were tired of their frames being caved in on machines with indirect (outside) mounting.
I'm not sure how this could be called indirect, as the frame is "physically" secured, in most cases, in 6 places.
With 99% of machines on the planet (maybe a little less) having indirect (outside) mounting, it has to be a conspiracy that's industry driven.
The fact that the yoke and handle on a frame add stability and structural integrity to a frame, and the fact that the 1st 2 or 3 X's add stability to the H have nothing to do with it.
The motive for my question is: if you string a frame 1 pcs (using ATW) when the manufacturer "requires" 2 pcs, will the warranty be viod?

When I first started stringing, my wife's Wilson snapped. We were hitting close to the net "getting loose" and I heard a crack. Her frame just snapped.
I strung that frame T to H, as specified and had a 2 pnt (neos, klippermate) type mounting system on the machine I had at the time.
Wilson replaced the racquet but I never strung a frame T to H again.
I'm quite certain the industry has it all wrong..........
I'm out

kkm
11-03-2010, 05:53 AM
Hmmm...I'm not quite sure how to interpret this...
although this doesn't answer my OP question of "what do experienced stringers do when 2 piece is required", it does give me some insight.
I'm pretty sure Head, Yonex and other "2 piece required" manufactured were tired of their frames being caved in on machines with indirect (outside) mounting.
I'm not sure how this could be called indirect, as the frame is "physically" secured, in most cases, in 6 places.
With 99% of machines on the planet (maybe a little less) having indirect (outside) mounting, it has to be a conspiracy that's industry driven.
The fact that the yoke and handle on a frame add stability and structural integrity to a frame, and the fact that the 1st 2 or 3 X's add stability to the H have nothing to do with it.
The motive for my question is: if you string a frame 1 pcs (using ATW) when the manufacturer "requires" 2 pcs, will the warranty be viod?

When I first started stringing, my wife's Wilson snapped. We were hitting close to the net "getting loose" and I heard a crack. Her frame just snapped.
I strung that frame T to H, as specified and had a 2 pnt (neos, klippermate) type mounting system on the machine I had at the time.
Wilson replaced the racquet but I never strung a frame T to H again.
I'm quite certain the industry has it all wrong..........
I'm out

2-piece was probably manufacturers getting tired of people stringing their racquets T to H on machines with poor support, not good 6-point support, but poor 2-point support. 2-point support was less bad for strong racquets from before but not good for many of the thin wall modern racquets.
Stringway is not the only support system acceptable for stringing. Other machine supports work well, and where is the stringer's accountability for a good result? ATW was used to maintain racquet shape when using poor 2-point support, so it is possible to make a good result with creativity. Use H adapter for racquets with flexible hoop, example Head, also for Yonex because of the particular shape.

dgdawg
11-03-2010, 06:48 AM
2-piece was probably manufacturers getting tired of people stringing their racquets T to H on machines with poor support, not good 6-point support, but poor 2-point support. 2-point support was less bad for strong racquets from before but not good for many of the thin wall modern racquets.
Stringway is not the only support system acceptable for stringing. Other machine supports work well, and where is the stringer's accountability for a good result? ATW was used to maintain racquet shape when using poor 2-point support, so it is possible to make a good result with creativity. Use H adapter for racquets with flexible hoop, example Head, also for Yonex because of the particular shape.

Great post, kkm.
IMO...you're right on. "Back in the day" when frames were made from railroad track, machines didn't need as good a mounting system.
As I stated, there's a reason most racks are 6 pnt these days.
I have yet to see a stringway in a Tier 1 or Tier 2 stringing room. (not that I've ever been IN one of these rooms. I hope to be one day, tho)
I NEVER string T to H. I just think it's not good for the frame.
I really don't care if the instructions permit it, I DON'T do it. This is MY OPINION and OPTION.

All I am really trying to ascertain is:
Will stringing one piece VOID WARRANTY. I guess I should have been more clear in my OP.
I suppost the ONLY way to find this out is to contact the manufacturer directly.
Lets put this one to bed.........

kkm
11-03-2010, 07:47 AM
Great post, kkm.
IMO...you're right on. "Back in the day" when frames were made from railroad track, machines didn't need as good a mounting system.
As I stated, there's a reason most racks are 6 pnt these days.
I have yet to see a stringway in a Tier 1 or Tier 2 stringing room. (not that I've ever been IN one of these rooms. I hope to be one day, tho)
I NEVER string T to H. I just think it's not good for the frame.
I really don't care if the instructions permit it, I DON'T do it. This is MY OPINION and OPTION.

All I am really trying to ascertain is:
Will stringing one piece VOID WARRANTY. I guess I should have been more clear in my OP.
I suppost the ONLY way to find this out is to contact the manufacturer directly.
Lets put this one to bed.........

Yes I think it is best to check with each manufacturer if stringing one piece for example atw would void the warranty or if this would be fine since the crosses would go from H to T.

MuscleWeave
11-03-2010, 03:33 PM
dgdawg

Sorry I hijacked your thread.

MW

dgdawg
11-03-2010, 03:38 PM
dgdawg

Sorry I hijacked your thread.

MW

No sweat, bro!!

Lakers4Life
11-03-2010, 08:18 PM
I do a two piece if it's stated in the stringers digest or manufacturer's site. Even if it's not a hybrid.

Before I dreaded doing a two-piece job, because did not have a starting clamp at the time. Now it's not that big of a hassle.

Technatic
11-03-2010, 11:13 PM
I'm not sure how this could be called indirect, as the frame is "physically" secured, in most cases, in 6 places.
With 99% of machines on the planet (maybe a little less) having indirect (outside) mounting, it has to be a conspiracy that's industry driven.


2-piece was probably manufacturers getting tired of people stringing their racquets T to H on machines with poor support, not good 6-point support, but poor 2-point support. 2-point support was less bad for strong racquets from before but not good for many of the thin wall modern racquets.


“Indirect mounting” means that the mounting system does not support the racquet in the direction of the maximum load during stringing;

* The worst moment for the racquet occurs when all the main strings are tensioned. The strings pull the racquet head inwards.
- On a direct support system the supports work against the inside of the racquet and push the racquet outwards where the main strings pull it inwards.

- When the racquet gets shorter it gets wider also.
On an outside (6 point) mounting system the supports work on the outside preventing the racquet from getting wider.
Because the widening of the head is not the major deformation this is called indirect.

The problem with this is that the forces of the outside supports have to be transferred to the position of the main strings and this causes stress in the racquet material.

The funny thing is that 6 point mounting systems which are not so “good” (less stiff) are better for the racquet because the load on the supports is lower.

* Why do 90 % of the machines have indirect mounting systems??
I do not understand at all, it must be “go with the flow” and Babolat does it so all the others follow.

You never hear of any problems on very simple direct systems like on the Ektelon.(3 point). Even a cheap machine like the Klippermate works well.

There are quite some discussions about racquets getting stuck on 6 points systems.

When I first started stringing, my wife's Wilson snapped. We were hitting close to the net "getting loose" and I heard a crack. Her frame just snapped.
I strung that frame T to H, as specified and had a 2 pnt (neos, klippermate) type mounting system on the machine I had at the time.
Wilson replaced the racquet but I never strung a frame T to H again.


Could it be that the tension on the crosses has been too high? The Klippermate does not have the problem of high forces of the outside supports.

Irvin
11-04-2010, 03:33 AM
“Indirect mounting” means that the mounting system does not support the racquet in the direction of the maximum load during stringing;

* The worst moment for the racquet occurs when all the main strings are tensioned. The strings pull the racquet head inwards.
- On a direct support system the supports work against the inside of the racquet and push the racquet outwards where the main strings pull it inwards.

- When the racquet gets shorter it gets wider also...

On my 6 point machine the racket does not get shorter unless I do not have the 6 and 12 o'clock supports adjusted properly. BUT, I have to admit the more I get away from the center mains the sides do tend to bulge out. I know this because the side supports get very tight as I start stringing the outside mains but the side supports do well to maintain the original shape of the racket by applying force in the opposite direction of the deformation.

If a 6 point machine is indirect mounting (as you and many others proclaim, and indirect mounting does not support the racket in the direction of the load) how do you explain the 6 and 12 o'clock supports preventing the racket from getting shorter and the outside supports preventing the racket from getting wider? Seems to me like if you wanted to support the racket in the opposite direction of the load you would put the 6 and 12 o'clock supports on the outside of the frame and the outside supports on the inside.

FYI - http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=260407

I think direct and indirect mounting is a bunch of some marketeer's mumbo jumbo anyway. If I were stringing a badminton racket on a 6 point tennis stringer (here the side supports could be around 3 and 9 oclock and deform the racket into an hour glass) I can see where it would make a lot of difference though but I don't string badminton rackets.

Irvin

dgdawg
11-04-2010, 04:58 AM
“Indirect mounting” means that the mounting system does not support the racquet in the direction of the maximum load during stringing;

* The worst moment for the racquet occurs when all the main strings are tensioned. The strings pull the racquet head inwards.
- On a direct support system the supports work against the inside of the racquet and push the racquet outwards where the main strings pull it inwards.

- When the racquet gets shorter it gets wider also.
On an outside (6 point) mounting system the supports work on the outside preventing the racquet from getting wider.
Because the widening of the head is not the major deformation this is called indirect.

The problem with this is that the forces of the outside supports have to be transferred to the position of the main strings and this causes stress in the racquet material.

The funny thing is that 6 point mounting systems which are not so “good” (less stiff) are better for the racquet because the load on the supports is lower.

* Why do 90 % of the machines have indirect mounting systems??
I do not understand at all, it must be “go with the flow” and Babolat does it so all the others follow.

You never hear of any problems on very simple direct systems like on the Ektelon.(3 point). Even a cheap machine like the Klippermate works well.

There are quite some discussions about racquets getting stuck on 6 points systems.



Could it be that the tension on the crosses has been too high? The Klippermate does not have the problem of high forces of the outside supports.

Hmmm....
By reading this, one would have to conclude: the entire industry is WHACK!!!!!!
I have no other choice than to sell my Star 5. Actually, after reading this post, I'm thinking it's such a POS, I should probably just give it away.
I got nothing.
I'm gonna call my boy Mark @ Alpha and see if he'll trade me, "even up" for a stringway.......

Incidentally....my wife's Wilson frame that cracked.......I strung it on the 1st machine I owned. A machine with a "direct" mounting system.

See ya peeps!!!
I'm out

Irvin
11-04-2010, 05:20 AM
^^ 'dgdawg' I would not just give my machine away but it you need my address let me know. LOL

These terms are confusing I agree but they are acknowledged by the industry. It all boils down to which support system is best and that argument could go on forever and a day.

Back to your original question. If it is required by the manufacturer do it unless the owner of the racket requests something different. Also just because the manufacturer reccomends one way does not mean it must be strung that one certain way. Take Babolat for instance, I contacted them and was told ALL their rackets should be strung two piece but if you look on their website they give you the option of stringing one piece or two piece on most rackets. And Prince, all their newer rackets have a short side and a long side which infers one piece but two piece is fine too. Price says ALL their racket's crosses must be strung top down but I contacted them too and 2 piece 50/50 is ok.

Irvin

bcart1991
11-04-2010, 05:46 AM
Just to interject...

I use a Klippermate (two-point mounting), have used it since '98.
I have been using the same frame since '01-ish.
I string one-piece 90% of the time.
I string throat-to-head 90% of the time.
I have yet to experience the first problem with any of my frames using this method.

goran_ace
11-04-2010, 05:47 AM
O.K...so.....
What do all you experienced stringers do with customers frames, when a 2 piece is required?

If it's for a customer do a 2 piece on that racket. Only exception is if they specifically instruct you to do it another way. The odds of the racket breaking on the stringer are slim, but when someone else is paying you for your services you have to think about what if it does happen.

If it's your own racket you can do it however you want and shouldn't worry too much about it.

dgdawg
11-04-2010, 05:57 AM
^^ 'dgdawg' I would not just give my machine away but it you need my address let me know. LOL

These terms are confusing I agree but they are acknowledged by the industry. It all boils down to which support system is best and that argument could go on forever and a day.

Back to your original question. If it is required by the manufacturer do it unless the owner of the racket requests something different.

Irvin

lol.......I can't send it till I get my stringway........

I have a call in to Head.
I just wanna talk to the source!!!!!
I really don't think it's a big deal. I'd just rather string 1 piece when I can.
It seems to go a little quicker for me, and it saves a little string.

I get the terms.
I've have seen these discussions before.
Someone started a thread: "Top 5 machines on the Planet" (or something to that effect)
A lot of heavy hitters weighed in on it.
One person, who's opinion I respect (dude strings @ Grand Slams) weighed in and, if I recall, viewed the Star5/Sensor as the top 2 or 3 clamps and mounting systems.
Just sayin.....

dgdawg
11-04-2010, 06:02 AM
If it's for a customer do a 2 piece on that racket. Only exception is if they specifically instruct you to do it another way. The odds of the racket breaking on the stringer are slim, but when someone else is paying you for your services you have to think about what if it does happen.

If it's your own racket you can do it however you want and shouldn't worry too much about it.

My thoughts exactly. The only way I would ever deviate from this is if I was told directly from a manufactures rep. Probably not even then, if someone is paying me.

dgdawg
11-04-2010, 04:41 PM
OK...so I spoke to a Head racquet tech today. He said 2 piece is required. If one of there frames breaks and it was discovered it was done 1 piece, they won't replace it.
EVEN IF ATW WAS ALLEDGEDLY DONE.
He said there is know way of knowing that.
The reasoning is, every frame is stronger at the T and starting at the H puts less stress on the frame.
He also reccomends using a starting clamp vs. a starting knot when starting the X's.
That puts less stress on the frame AND the anchor string.

I can't wait to hear why this tech is wrong.

Technatic
11-05-2010, 12:23 AM
On my 6 point machine the racket does not get shorter unless I do not have the 6 and 12 o'clock supports adjusted properly. BUT, I have to admit the more I get away from the center mains the sides do tend to bulge out. I know this because the side supports get very tight as I start stringing the outside mains but the side supports do well to maintain the original shape of the racket by applying force in the opposite direction of the deformation.

If a 6 point machine is indirect mounting (as you and many others proclaim, and indirect mounting does not support the racket in the direction of the load) how do you explain the 6 and 12 o'clock supports preventing the racket from getting shorter and the outside supports preventing the racket from getting wider? Seems to me like if you wanted to support the racket in the opposite direction of the load you would put the 6 and 12 o'clock supports on the outside of the frame and the outside supports on the inside.

Of course the supports on 6 and 12 o’clock take a lot of load, but they are very narrow also.
This means that the racquet is actually bent around these support. The simple system of the old Ektelon with the 2 rotating support on 60 mm apart from each other is much much better.
The very narrow centre supports do not only cause the racquet to bent around it but also cause a high pressure between the racquet and the support (kg/mm^2).
The available H- pieces lower this pressure considerably and I would use them as often as possible.

So supports have to be in the right position and be as wide as possible also.
Doesn’t SP have a machine with 4 inside supports and 4 outside supports.

Hmmm....
By reading this, one would have to conclude: the entire industry is WHACK!!!!!!
I have no other choice than to sell my Star 5. Actually, after reading this post, I'm thinking it's such a POS, I should probably just give it away.
I got nothing.
I'm gonna call my boy Mark @ Alpha and see if he'll trade me, "even up" for a stringway.......

No reason to sell your machine dgdawg, every tool has its pros and contras, as long as you know how to cope with them there is no problem.

But if you have thought that the Start 5 is the perfect machine, it may be a disappointment.

In my opinion as an engineer the racquet supports on stringing machines have been developed by looking what happens during stringing and not by calculating the minimum stress in the racquet material.

Perfect support??
It could be interesting to find out how the perfect mounting would look like??

My suggestion would be:
Put an inside support at every position of a main string so that the force of every string works directly on the support at that position.
In this way the racquet would not feel anything.

What do you think?

Technatic
11-05-2010, 12:28 AM
dgdawg OK...so I spoke to a Head racquet tech today. He said 2 piece is required. If one of there frames breaks and it was discovered it was done 1 piece, they won't replace it.
EVEN IF ATW WAS ALLEDGEDLY DONE.
He said there is know way of knowing that.
The reasoning is, every frame is stronger at the T and starting at the H puts less stress on the frame.
He also reccomends using a starting clamp vs. a starting knot when starting the X's.
That puts less stress on the frame AND the anchor string.



The interesting question remains: What is the difference for the racquet between 2 piece and ATW, both going from H to T?

Did he say something about that??

dgdawg
11-05-2010, 04:52 AM
Of course the supports on 6 and 12 o’clock take a lot of load, but they are very narrow also.
This means that the racquet is actually bent around these support. The simple system of the old Ektelon with the 2 rotating support on 60 mm apart from each other is much much better.
The very narrow centre supports do not only cause the racquet to bent around it but also cause a high pressure between the racquet and the support (kg/mm^2).
The available H- pieces lower this pressure considerably and I would use them as often as possible.

So supports have to be in the right position and be as wide as possible also.
Doesn’t SP have a machine with 4 inside supports and 4 outside supports.


No reason to sell your machine dgdawg, every tool has its pros and contras, as long as you know how to cope with them there is no problem.

But if you have thought that the Start 5 is the perfect machine, it may be a disappointment.

In my opinion as an engineer the racquet supports on stringing machines have been developed by looking what happens during stringing and not by calculating the minimum stress in the racquet material.

Perfect support??
It could be interesting to find out how the perfect mounting would look like??

My suggestion would be:
Put an inside support at every position of a main string so that the force of every string works directly on the support at that position.
In this way the racquet would not feel anything.

What do you think?

What do I think?
Technatic-I would NEVER purposely be openly disrespectful of anyone OR their opinion.
With this said, I think a lot of your ideas send the wrong message to ppl looking for guidance on these forums.
I'm NOT an engineer, retired or otherwise.
I do, however, believe the industry has spent a lot of time and money on R&D on this vary thing. Research on cause and effect of tensioning, and development of the "perfect" mounting system.
You mentioned SP and their 4 inside, 4 outside supports. The frame I strung that cracked?. I strung it on THAT very system.
On another website, there are extensive pictures of various stringing rooms taken at Grand Slam Tournaments.
You will not find one neos/stringway type mounting system.
I will answer your question with a question of my own: Why is that?
The systems you refer to rely on "clamping" pressure to secure a frame. Again, I'm NOT an expert, and will never claim to be, but wouldn't a better "machine" than say a Sensor, Baiardo, Tecnifibre, etc.. have a neos/stringway style mounting system, with a precision tensioner??
You could argue that a stringway takes longer to mount. Well, maybe, but don't you think the "experts" would sacrifice the extra 30 sec. for a more secure system????
I believe Agassi traveled with a personal stringer that used a Bab. Star 4. I could be wrong, but I'm pretty confident it wasn't a stringway.
Why was that?

All frames bend and flex. They're designed to. If they didn't, players arms would fall off. IMPO, a good mounting system will maintain the designed shape on the finished string job.

Irvin
11-05-2010, 04:59 AM
...
All frames bend and flex. They're designed to. If they didn't, players arms would fall off. IMPO, a good mounting system will maintain the designed shape on the finished string job.

Well said 'dgdawg.' Even though it would be difficult removing a frame (or even losening the side mounts with only the mains strung) when I finish stirnging the mounts and racket is as easy to remove as it was to install. I have had all types of stringers and mounting systems and by far the one I have now is far and away the best ever.

Irvin

dgdawg
11-05-2010, 05:26 AM
The interesting question remains: What is the difference for the racquet between 2 piece and ATW, both going from H to T?

Did he say something about that??

I did bring this up.
He said warranty would be void, upon breakage, if strung one piece, period.
Dudes comment was: "They're thousands of stringers at various "levels of expertise" throughout the world. Some have never heard of ATW, much less know the procedure. This is a blanket statement to protect our product and cover our azz"
Off the record he did think ATW was an acceptable "work around" for the H to T dilemma but would NOT be excepted by HEAD.
I said I personally NEVER string T to H. He still said: "Head recommends 2 piece"
I countered that with: "there is a difference between recommend and mandatory".
His comment: "Head recommends 2 piece"
I can appreciate his "corporate" stance.

dgdawg
11-05-2010, 05:32 AM
Well said 'dgdawg.' Even though it would be difficult removing a frame (or even losening the side mounts with only the mains strung) when I finish stirnging the mounts and racket is as easy to remove as it was to install. I have had all types of stringers and mounting systems and by far the one I have now is far and away the best ever.

Irvin

Thanks Irvin....I've used a few in my day as well.
I'm kind of liking the Star 5 system.
I've checked unstrung frames vs. strung frames on my Star 5 and they have all been exact....as far as I can tell.

tennisnoob3
11-05-2010, 05:45 AM
What companies require two piece??

origmarm
11-05-2010, 05:52 AM
OK...so I spoke to a Head racquet tech today. He said 2 piece is required. If one of there frames breaks and it was discovered it was done 1 piece, they won't replace it.
EVEN IF ATW WAS ALLEDGEDLY DONE.
He said there is know way of knowing that.
The reasoning is, every frame is stronger at the T and starting at the H puts less stress on the frame.
He also reccomends using a starting clamp vs. a starting knot when starting the X's.
That puts less stress on the frame AND the anchor string.

I can't wait to hear why this tech is wrong.

Hi there dgdawg. Sorry I'm a bit late to the party but this was almost exactly what I was told by Head also, though this was in 2000 (!). The bit then didn't mention was the starting clamp vs the starting knot.

Interesting though given that the two people I have had contact with that string at slams both told me they do ATW unless otherwise specified by the player. Including on the many Head frames they string...

Cheers,

Orig

dgdawg
11-05-2010, 06:07 AM
Hi there dgdawg. Sorry I'm a bit late to the party but this was almost exactly what I was told by Head also, though this was in 2000 (!). The bit then didn't mention was the starting clamp vs the starting knot.

Interesting though given that the two people I have had contact with that string at slams both told me they do ATW unless otherwise specified by the player. Including on the many Head frames they string...

Cheers,

Orig

Hey man....i feel ya.
I'm pretty confident if a Head frame snapped with a one piece job, and it was determined it was strung by a Grand Slam Stringer, I'm sure Head would take her/his word for it and replace it.
I'm also pretty confident they would tell a guy like me to go pound sand. :)
I think (ONLY MY OPINION) frames should be strung per manufacturer specs, especially if someone pays you.
The starting clamp thing was interesting to me as well. The USRSA didn't identify the "frame safety" but they did tell me THEY are now recommending this method to minimize stress on the anchor string. Makes sense....

Irvin
11-05-2010, 06:36 AM
^^ I like using a starting clamp instead of a starting knot because I like the looks of a tie off knot better than a starting knot. I also think there is less stress on the anchor string's grommet hole if you do not use the starting knot.

One other point I may add is I wait until I string at least 5 or 7 cross string before I tie off the top cross in a two piece job. Then when I pull tension to remove the starting clamp I push the clamp against the mains to reduce drawback. With the string bed strung this makes the strings stiffer and there is minimum drawback sometime none.

Irvin

dgdawg
11-05-2010, 08:40 AM
^^ I like using a starting clamp instead of a starting knot because I like the looks of a tie off knot better than a starting knot. I also think there is less stress on the anchor string's grommet hole if you do not use the starting knot.

One other point I may add is I wait until I string at least 5 or 7 cross string before I tie off the top cross in a two piece job. Then when I pull tension to remove the starting clamp I push the clamp against the mains to reduce drawback. With the string bed strung this makes the strings stiffer and there is minimum drawback sometime none.

Irvin

I used to get a fair amount of drawback on my Alpha clamp bases.
I found myself clamping the string and then applying pressure towards the tensioner before locking the base. That eliminated virtually all draw back.
Give it a shot, bro. You may find the same result.

kkm
11-05-2010, 09:03 AM
With this said, I think a lot of your ideas send the wrong message to ppl looking for guidance on these forums.
All frames bend and flex.
IMPO, a good mounting system will maintain the designed shape on the finished string job.

Dgdawg, all very good points.
I think that most proselytising for Stringway either have a financial interest in doing so, or are novice stringers swayed by scare tactics and criticism of the competition.
The Stringway marketing material with data showing tension loss for lockout systems were for stringing on lockout cranking as quickly as possible. It's also possible to let a dropweight fall rapidly. Do all stringers crank as quickly as possible or let the dropweight fall rapidly?
The Stringway illustrations showing frame and turntable bending look like vastly exaggerated cartoons.
Now they concede that using the H adapter is effective.
I do not think that the Concorde system can allow friction-free pulling of centre mains.

kkm
11-05-2010, 09:11 AM
I'm pretty confident if a Head frame snapped with a one piece job, and it was determined it was strung by a Grand Slam Stringer, I'm sure Head would take her/his word for it and replace it.
I'm also pretty confident they would tell a guy like me to go pound sand. :)
I think (ONLY MY OPINION) frames should be strung per manufacturer specs, especially if someone pays you.
The starting clamp thing was interesting to me as well. The USRSA didn't identify the "frame safety" but they did tell me THEY are now recommending this method to minimize stress on the anchor string. Makes sense....

Another good point, stringing for sponsored tournament players is different from stringing for others. Sponsored players can have their racquets strung over max recommended tension, 1-piece, 2-piece, head-throat or throat-head without worrying about voiding a warranty. Many of them have their racquets strung every day and aren't so concerned about the longevity and durability of a stringing.

Technatic
11-05-2010, 09:38 AM
Hi guys,

I would like to enjoy these discussions.

But it is a little disappointing that you have to attack a purely technical discussion with untechnical arguments.

Although I am a supporter of the stringway system I did not mention Stringway at all, it is not in my interest. I am just a SW user.

I would appreciate it when you can keep the discussion fair and to the point.

Thanks
Tecna

kkm
11-05-2010, 10:51 AM
Hi guys,

I would like to enjoy these discussions.

But it is a little disappointing that you have to attack a purely technical discussion with untechnical arguments.

Although I am a supporter of the stringway system I did not mention Stringway at all, it is not in my interest. I am just a SW user.

I would appreciate it when you can keep the discussion fair and to the point.

Thanks
Tecna

I think we've stayed mostly on subject with technical discussion.
Stringway is the party who have previously written negative blanket statements in their marketing material about East Asian manufacturing and crank machines being preferred by Americans. Neither of those was a technical point. Each could be taken as a flagrant insult toward a general group of people. Stringway representation have also spoken of Americans putting ketchup on everything as some analogy w/r/t their supposed widespread use of crank machines, and said that the Babolat Star 5 is a machine the French even offer to their EU market because the EU won't buy such a (implied crappy) machine.

Even though he referred nonspecifically to a Stringway connection

http://www.stringforum.net/board/showthread.php?p=13514#post13514

and recently revealed himself to be Fred Timmer

http://www.stringforum.net/board/showthread.php?p=16559#post16559

what he portrayed before could have been misleading, no?

http://www.stringforum.net/board/showthread.php?p=14135#post14135

This is why I wonder about the tact of Stringway's marketing methods and extent of their presence on message boards. What's real, and what's sock puppeting?


Back on topic, the bottom line is that a good stringer can produce a good result with different machines and for different types of tennis players.

kkm
11-05-2010, 11:02 AM
What companies require two piece??

Head, Yonex

Irvin
11-05-2010, 11:36 AM
I used to get a fair amount of drawback on my Alpha clamp bases.
I found myself clamping the string and then applying pressure towards the tensioner before locking the base. That eliminated virtually all draw back.
Give it a shot, bro. You may find the same result.

I do just the opposite. I push the clamps against the main strings (I always try to tie the top and bottom corsses) away from the tension so when the tensioner is removed the clamp is not drawn back into the mains.

Irvin

Technatic
11-05-2010, 11:00 PM
Neither of those was a technical point. Each could be taken as a flagrant insult toward a general group of people. Stringway representation have also spoken of Americans putting ketchup on everything as some analogy w/r/t their supposed widespread use of crank machines, and said that the Babolat Star 5 is a machine the French even offer to their EU market because the EU won't buy such a (implied crappy) machine.


Who said all this?


ven though he referred nonspecifically to a Stringway connection

http://www.stringforum.net/board/sho...3514#post13514

and recently revealed himself to be Fred Timmer

http://www.stringforum.net/board/sho...6559#post16559

what he portrayed before could have been misleading, no?

http://www.stringforum.net/board/sho...4135#post14135
E

No idea what you are proving with this.

The good thing about the Stringforum and Saitenforum is that manufacturers are allowed to enter the discussion to give information.

kkm
11-06-2010, 02:53 AM
Who said all this?

I think it is better not to mention names or speculate on the specific persons. At least I will not participate in that. Most of those things said were before on some of the Stringway and affiliate web sites (can not remember which specific country sites), but are not present any more.

No idea what you are proving with this.

The good thing about the Stringforum and Saitenforum is that manufacturers are allowed to enter the discussion to give information.

I do not know of anyone saying or suggesting that manufacturers should not enter discussions here. But, especially with all the social media and not knowing who has what vested interests, disclosure is appropriate.
Information is not the same as subjective matter presented in a dogmatic manner as information.