View Full Version : one-piece or two-piece stringing? does it matter.
06-23-2004, 11:44 AM
I recently bought a tennis stringer. I looked on tennis-warehouses racket information for information on stringing my wilson prostaff rok. It said to use a one-piece stringing. When I took it to my local pro, he said that I should use a two-piece string job because my crosses started at the bottom, and the should always start at the top. He said that this is done to prevent a mushrooming effect as you string the crosses on the way up. I'd really like to know. thanks.
06-23-2004, 12:11 PM
Wilson racquets are an exception. They can be strung 1 piece eventhough the mains end at the throat. However, to be safe I string these using the 1 piece Around The World(ATW) pattern instead of 2 piece.
06-23-2004, 12:55 PM
If you don't know how to string ATW, then 2 piece is by far the most safest and practical to do.
06-24-2004, 08:05 AM
on the basic question of one vs. two piece stringing (assuming you can use either in a racket), here's what i've found:
one piece stringing generally holds tension a little better during the stringing process (fewer knots to tie) but then looses tension quicker over the next few weeks on the racket.
two piece stinging may loose an lb. or so while stringing but as long as you're consistent in method, you can adjust for this. two piece stringing maintains tension better on the racket. this is very important to me as I string my current rackets pretty tight and when they loose tension, I can't keep control of the ball. Also, two piece stringing is quicker for me as the length of string hanging off the racket during stringing is shorter much of the time, thereby getting tangled a lot less.
i obviously prefer two piece stringing.
06-24-2004, 09:34 AM
Whenever this topic of one piece versus two piece stringing is brought up it is always intriguing to me. I understand the theory of why two piece stringing is preferred on certain racquets but what I don't understand is if the crosses should not be strung from the throat to the head then why do racquet manufacturers publish stringing patterns that suggest one piece stringing with the crosses strung from the throat to the head? Why does the USRSA Stringer's Manual have dozens of one piece patterns where the crosses are strung from the throat to the head? I have been a USRSA member for a few years and have strung lots of different frames. When I get a frame to string I refer to my USRSA stringing manual for the pattern and I follow it when stringing. I have not seen anything from the USRSA touting the ATW method of one piece stringing if the crosses are strung from the throat to the head. This is interesting since CRT and MRT certifications from the USRSA are generally looked upon as lofty achievements in the world of racquet stringing and clearly the USRSA is generally considered the top notch organization when it comes to racquet stringing. Why doesn't the USRSA point out that stringing crosses from the throat to the head should not be performed even of the manufacturer says it is OK? Without offense to any of the stringing officinados on this board is this concern about stringing crosses from the throat to the head nothing more than a tempest in a teapot? Should I toss my USRSA manual because they publish string patterns that do call for stringing the crosses from the throat to the head? Are racquet manufacturers (e.g. Babolat) deliberately misleading stringers by publishing stringing patterns on the websites that recommend one piece stringing with the crosses strung from the throat to the head?
BTW I have never had a problem with any racquet when stringing crosses from the throat to the head using a one piece method.
06-24-2004, 10:29 AM
Cruzer, I understand where you are coming from. I don't think it is that important, but it is better to string from the head to the throat. If you have the option, why not do what is better for the racquet.
06-24-2004, 11:19 AM
Cruzer, even Wilson has said it is safer to string their frames from head to throat even though they say it is o.k. to string them bottom up. In fact, Wilson says the safest method is to string the crosses 50/50. But, almost no one does it that way. There is nothing wrong with following the USRSA string patterns. Some stringers just feel it is even better to use an ATW pattern on these or do it two piece.
06-24-2004, 12:20 PM
Do you ever want to do a two piece just so you dont have to thread 20 extra feet of string through the long side 8 or 9 times ?
. . . Bud
06-24-2004, 12:59 PM
bsandy, yes, I strung 2 piece most of the time for a long time and resisted using 1 piece patterns. Now that I use them most of the time, it is really no big deal to pull the extra string through. After the first few mains are threaded it seems almost as easy as doing it using 2 pieces. Also, I was fascinated with all of the ATW patterns and they are 1 piece patterns only and a 1 piece ATW job with the "Richard Parnell signature" tie off knots is so neat and tidy I just can't go back.
06-24-2004, 01:07 PM
My only worry about a 2 piece is . . . if I break a main and I don't have anything to cut the crosses, losing (or warping) a frame.
. . . Bud
06-24-2004, 02:48 PM
Breaking a main string in a one-piece pattern will do no less damage to a racket than breaking a main in a two-piece pattern. The crosses will still maintain nearly, if not, all of their tension either way. That is one reason why I carry a set of mini scissors in my bag.
On kind of a side note, one time when I was stringing the mains, I swore I could see the frame bending and getting mis-shapen. Also, a little bit ago, I noticed that one of my three frames was actually about a half inch shorter than the other two a making up for it by being a little wider. I don't know if that was from stringing or what, but it is the same now. Weird.
06-25-2004, 03:23 PM
tennsdog, you shouldn't be seeing those kinds of changes if your machine is holding the frame properly or unless you're stringing at extremely high tensions(70 lbs.).
06-25-2004, 05:44 PM
I did used to string at 70 lbs when I was using syn gut. That may have been the problem. Like I said, it is better now, so I am kind of just going to forget about it. I considered contacting Dunlop.
06-25-2004, 06:51 PM
I use 2 piece because I can't measure for my life. When I use 2 piece, I know I can just split the string in half and start.
vBulletin® v3.6.9, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.