PDA

View Full Version : Myth or fact: Open string pattern = more spin


blackdiamond
09-15-2006, 10:56 AM
I know this seems to be accepted as fact from what I've read but I'm wondering if this has ever been scientifically verified. Have there been experiments comparing spin production of an open vs. closed stringbed? I figure you would need a robotic arm to swing the racket exactly the same to do this experiment but it's definitely doable.

Tennis Man
09-15-2006, 11:05 AM
It's common sense, man. Just go to TW Learning Center and read some.

bsandy
09-15-2006, 11:06 AM
Fact

In my experience, it means more than thin strings. I used to used a i.s12 with 14 mains. Slice and kick serves were out of this world, but it had no touch or control.

Now . . . 16ga in my 103 300's yield more spin than 17ga in my 98 300's. I can only figure it's the distance between the strings that matter most.

I REALLY want to demo the TF 290 (with 14 mains), but had no time this summer.

. . . Bud

aeroman
09-15-2006, 01:16 PM
Totally fact I've played with a open string pattern and a dense one and it makes
a HUGE difference

Kevo
09-15-2006, 01:49 PM
I think it's pretty well accepted that this is true, but there are other factors involved, so it's probably not as big a difference as some might think. I think the most important factor how the strings contact the ball. Speed and angle of the strings against the ball. A more open pattern frame generally speaking has attributes that contribute to increased speed.

galain
09-15-2006, 03:13 PM
I always thought it was interesting that when Pro Kennex released their Micro line of frames they were claiming much better spin because of the greater surface area the dense string pattern allowed the ball to come into contact with.

Of course, at around the same time, Snauwaert were pushing the Hi Tens with the same marketing spiel but completely opposite concept.

The Pusher Terminator
09-15-2006, 03:18 PM
There is no answer! Everyone disagrees!

But if you ask me I would have to say that a more open loosely strung pattern gives the most spin. The reason? :

Spaghetti strings

These strings were unbelivably open. They only had like 6 mains and 10 crosses or something(I am sure I am off on this). They were also incredibly loose. These now illegal strings gave the most spin of any pattern. Therefore , following that line of logic therfore an open pattern strung loosely gives the most spin. IMO.

travlerajm
09-15-2006, 03:35 PM
The spin level is determined by the amount of deflection in the stringbed. An open pattern deflects more than a closed pattern. If you want to feel what a more open pattern would feel like, you can simply string your racquet looser with a thinner gauge.

A 17-g string at 55 lbs in an 18x20 pattern will be equivalent to a 16-g string at 60 lbs in a 16x18 pattern. This is because the total cross-sectional area of the stringbed will be about the same, and the degree of strain in the string will be about the same too. So the total deflection of the stringbed will be the same. The spin level and power level will be about the same too.

Gundam
09-15-2006, 03:40 PM
For me, the spin doctor (among my racquets) is the original Hammer 6.2 oversize (aka the skunk). The gap between the strings are more than 1cm. It looks very very open. And I feel like the hitting surface is almost 'stickly'.

jasonbourne
09-15-2006, 03:48 PM
The spin level is determined by the amount of deflection in the stringbed. An open pattern deflects more than a closed pattern. If you want to feel what a more open pattern would feel like, you can simply string your racquet looser with a thinner gauge.

A 17-g string at 55 lbs in an 18x20 pattern will be equivalent to a 16-g string at 60 lbs in a 16x18 pattern. This is because the total cross-sectional area of the stringbed will be about the same, and the degree of strain in the string will be about the same too. So the total deflection of the stringbed will be the same. The spin level and power level will be about the same too.

travlerajm, what is equivalent string guage and tension for 16x19 pattern wrt your example above?

jasonbourne
09-15-2006, 03:49 PM
travlerajm, what is equivalent string guage and tension for 16x19 pattern wrt your example above?

Also, I'm assuming in your example is for same head size.

onehandbh
09-15-2006, 04:05 PM
anyone ever try skipping holes to create a super open string pattern?
(e.g. taking the POS OS and just stringing everyone role in the mains &
crosses so that you end up with 8 crosses and about 9mains?)

Ulam
09-15-2006, 04:12 PM
The greater the distance between each string, the greater the spin. This has the most influence. A 14x16 string pattern strung in the middle of the recommended tension range will always have greater spin potential than a 16x19 string pattern no matter its tension range. It's common sense.

Roforot
09-15-2006, 05:59 PM
I believe according to Technical Tennis this is a myth as far as testing in the lab goes.

couch
09-15-2006, 07:34 PM
Maybe we should call the Myth Busters and have them test this one.

nalbandian_fan
09-15-2006, 07:39 PM
anyone ever try skipping holes to create a super open string pattern?
(e.g. taking the POS OS and just stringing everyone role in the mains &
crosses so that you end up with 8 crosses and about 9mains?)

lol i kinda want to try that

Ulam
09-15-2006, 07:54 PM
Is that illegal in USTA league?

BaseLineBash
09-15-2006, 08:21 PM
It is easier to hit top with an open string pattern, but you can also hit flat. Key-word here is "easier". I play the POG OS and most of my shots are flat to moderate top because that's how I choose to play.

haerdalis
09-16-2006, 04:47 AM
Mark Woodforde had what you might call an open string pattern...

slice bh compliment
09-16-2006, 05:13 AM
There is no answer! Everyone disagrees!

But if you ask me I would have to say that a more open loosely strung pattern gives the most spin. The reason? :

Spaghetti strings

These strings were unbelivably open. They only had like 6 mains and 10 crosses or something(I am sure I am off on this). They were also incredibly loose. These now illegal strings gave the most spin of any pattern. Therefore , following that line of logic therfore an open pattern strung loosely gives the most spin. IMO.

True. You're a little off on this, friend. A typical spaghetti pattern had two mains in the same holes near the center. Fewer crosses and some thin twine at the intersections.
Spaghetti was more about texture than openness.

Now re: 16x18 vs 18x20. All other things equal, I really do feel a subtle difference in durability (more for the denser pattern) and spin POTENTIAL (more in the open-ish one).
I have never tried a Woodfordesque frame, but I'm sure with the right strings, it would be a blast, spinwise. So vote "FACT".

Not that I'd consider using an open pattern. I'm happy with my frame: loving the power and the spins I get from my 18x20, and I really dig the control and touch. I just want to get to absolutely every single ball like Nadal of Fedi !

inferno303
09-16-2006, 05:34 AM
well in that case is there anything else good about dense patterns cept for control?

slice bh compliment
09-16-2006, 05:37 AM
well in that case is there anything else good about dense patterns cept for control?

durability

jasonbourne
09-16-2006, 07:08 AM
durability

More consistent stringbed response and better ball feel.

Will888
09-16-2006, 09:22 AM
well friction law says it should create moe spin because of the more grab on the ball.

The Pusher Terminator
09-16-2006, 10:41 AM
True. You're a little off on this, friend. A typical spaghetti pattern had two mains in the same holes near the center. Fewer crosses and some thin twine at the intersections.
Spaghetti was more about texture than openness.



why are you yelling? Did I say something to offend you?

Secondly you are partially incorrect. It is true that spaghetti strings had two strings going through each hole. But ask yourself:

Why was the spaghetti pattern so open?

The answer clearly is that the inventor found that an open string pattern gave more spin. Otherwise they would have simply created a dense pattern...no? Its the only thing that makes logical sense to me.

jackson vile
09-16-2006, 01:19 PM
True. You're a little off on this, friend. A typical spaghetti pattern had two mains in the same holes near the center. Fewer crosses and some thin twine at the intersections.
Spaghetti was more about texture than openness.

Now re: 16x18 vs 18x20. All other things equal, I really do feel a subtle difference in durability (more for the denser pattern) and spin POTENTIAL (more in the open-ish one).
I have never tried a Woodfordesque frame, but I'm sure with the right strings, it would be a blast, spinwise. So vote "FACT".

Not that I'd consider using an open pattern. I'm happy with my frame: loving the power and the spins I get from my 18x20, and I really dig the control and touch. I just want to get to absolutely every single ball like Nadal of Fedi !


The SS worked by catching the ball, grabing, and then helping in the propulsion of the ball by aplying aditional force to the ball.

When ever you feel the string bed grip on good shots, or you see that string on your racket has moved this is due to the strings catching the ball.

I have some pictures of where this actually happens on the string bed and good old Roger as Travler mentioned in past posts makes most use of this.

blackdiamond
09-18-2006, 07:53 AM
I don't think it's common sense that an open pattern produces more spin because there are so many factors. I think that the total deflection of the stringbed, which has been mentioned here, may be the most significant factor. The greater the deflection, the longer the ball is in contact with the strings and the more time the string has to impart spin on the ball. Given the same exact tension on an open vs closed string pattern, obviously the open string pattern will have more total deflection and hence more springyness and power(and I think spin). Maybe that is why people think that open strings produce more spin. But if we adjust the tension so that they have equal deflection, I'm not so sure the open will have more spin. In fact, because the closed strings will have more string in contact with the ball, there should be more friction and possibly more spin.

Someone call the myth busters!

The Pusher Terminator
09-18-2006, 09:25 AM
The SS worked by catching the ball, grabing, and then helping in the propulsion of the ball by aplying aditional force to the ball.

When ever you feel the string bed grip on good shots, or you see that string on your racket has moved this is due to the strings catching the ball.

I have some pictures of where this actually happens on the string bed and good old Roger as Travler mentioned in past posts makes most use of this.

But that ignores the question:

why was the spaghetti string pattern so open?

Clearly it had to create more spin, otherwise they would have made it denser....no?

Rabbit
09-18-2006, 09:30 AM
PT - I think you're missing the point. The original string bed of the frame served as a platform for the spaghetti as it were. The rubber bands, twine, paper clips and other stuff that went into the spaghetti string job rode on top of the regular string bed and was tied to it. The other guys were right, the spaghetti on top of the string was what affected the spin of the ball. It also silenced the ball so you couldn't tell how hard it was hit. The spaghetti jobs I've seen (and they varied) consisted of a frame that had the same number of mains and crosses as a regularly strung frame with all this other stuff tied to it or affixed some how to it.

bsandy
09-18-2006, 09:53 AM
. . . . . . . . .

bsandy
09-18-2006, 09:57 AM
Is that illegal in USTA league?

The rules are . . .

There has to be one pattern, and the are not allowed to get less dense, going toward the center of the pattern.

And . . .

There are rules about not attaching objects to the racquet (except vibe damps) and only using one set of string (except hybirding).

fastdunn
09-18-2006, 10:11 AM
The spin level is determined by the amount of deflection in the stringbed. An open pattern deflects more than a closed pattern. If you want to feel what a more open pattern would feel like, you can simply string your racquet looser with a thinner gauge.

A 17-g string at 55 lbs in an 18x20 pattern will be equivalent to a 16-g string at 60 lbs in a 16x18 pattern. This is because the total cross-sectional area of the stringbed will be about the same, and the degree of strain in the string will be about the same too. So the total deflection of the stringbed will be the same. The spin level and power level will be about the same too.

Oh my, you hit the nail on this issue....

jackson vile
09-18-2006, 11:45 AM
But that ignores the question:

why was the spaghetti string pattern so open?

Clearly it had to create more spin, otherwise they would have made it denser....no?

Oh you are correct also, the strings were made to catch the ball, just take a look,Http://www.itftennis.com/shared/medialibrary/image/staticarticle/IO_2784_staticarticle.JPG

http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/it/1997/4/1997_4_56.shtml

Also I want to point out there are are two different kinds also, but I can't find a pic of the earlier one.

It is not just one thing, open string pattern, friction, and the catching of the string to increase grab and force

jackson vile
09-18-2006, 11:49 AM
If we take 2 same exact rackets except one is open and one is closed the open will give more spin, this is why you will see that the closed patterns have much higher flex as to increase spin.

But with the open pattern you start to lose control so most of them are stiffer which increases control.

Look at Roger's setup, this is the max spin racket of all rackets ever (besides SS of course)

The Pusher Terminator
09-18-2006, 02:20 PM
Oh you are correct also, the strings were made to catch the ball, just take a look,Http://www.itftennis.com/shared/medialibrary/image/staticarticle/IO_2784_staticarticle.JPG

http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/it/1997/4/1997_4_56.shtml

Also I want to point out there are are two different kinds also, but I can't find a pic of the earlier one.

It is not just one thing, open string pattern, friction, and the catching of the string to increase grab and force

Thats actually not the original spaghetti string job. The pic you have is a poor copy.

The original did not have all the crap in it that your talking about. How do I know? because I bought one off of **** for $300 bucks!

Anyway, the original had two strings through the same hole. In fact the reason they were made illegal is because the tennis establishment thought the ball was getting a "double hit" from the double stringing.

In any event I am sure it is a combination of double stringing, texture and also the open string pattern. Again, clearly if a dense string pattern gave more spin then the inventor would have logically made the spagehetti racquet with a dense string pattern.

Donnie Darko
09-18-2006, 02:38 PM
Fact



I REALLY want to demo the TF 290 (with 14 mains), but had no time this summer.




I bought one and there is a noticeable difference in the amount of spin I generate with this racquet. Getting spin with other racquets is not a problem for me, but when switching back from the TF 290 it seems hard at first.

slice bh compliment
09-18-2006, 05:19 PM
why are you yelling? Did I say something to offend you?

Secondly you are partially incorrect. It is true that spaghetti strings had two strings going through each hole. But ask yourself:

Why was the spaghetti pattern so open?

The answer clearly is that the inventor found that an open string pattern gave more spin. Otherwise they would have simply created a dense pattern...no? Its the only thing that makes logical sense to me.

I was not yelling, hahahah. No, I thought all caps denoted the raising of the 'voice'.
I used the larger font to help raise a subtle diff, that's all, man.

jackson vile
09-18-2006, 05:20 PM
Thats actually not the original spaghetti string job. The pic you have is a poor copy.

The original did not have all the crap in it that your talking about. How do I know? because I bought one off of **** for $300 bucks!

Anyway, the original had two strings through the same hole. In fact the reason they were made illegal is because the tennis establishment thought the ball was getting a "double hit" from the double stringing.

In any event I am sure it is a combination of double stringing, texture and also the open string pattern. Again, clearly if a dense string pattern gave more spin then the inventor would have logically made the spagehetti racquet with a dense string pattern.

I believe I stated that there are two different kinds and that you could be talking about the other.

Make no mistake about it that is an original from way way back when, I have also seen what you are taking about and as I said I could not find a pick of that.

I even listed reference with article, so tell you what you go argue with the pics, the tennis players, and the historians.

Sorry I wasted my time LOL

slice bh compliment
09-18-2006, 05:23 PM
why are you yelling? Did I say something to offend you?

Secondly you are partially incorrect. It is true that spaghetti strings had two strings going through each hole. But ask yourself:

Why was the spaghetti pattern so open?

The answer clearly is that the inventor found that an open string pattern gave more spin. Otherwise they would have simply created a dense pattern...no? Its the only thing that makes logical sense to me.

Oh, and I think we agree in general. I hate to nitpick, but the spaghetti pattern (besides being moot and not legal) is not the best example of an open pattern. While it is less dense, it's texture makes it so good at aiding with spin...and I think that takes away from, or at least obfuscates the argument.

jackson vile
09-18-2006, 05:27 PM
Oh, and I think we agree in general. I hate to nitpick, but the spaghetti pattern (besides being moot and not legal) is not the best example of an open pattern. While it is less dense, it's texture makes it so good at aiding with spin...and I think that takes away from, or at least obfuscates the argument.


Once again that is only type the other had no more texture than regular string, it ends up being more open than any other pattern because it is not woven, so the string grip the ball and cup much more on the horizontal axis of the racket.

So finally both of you are right and hold truths, neither one of you have it 100% right.

And as you can see with the later SS they did indeed add stringing across (as you can see in red) to add more texture and grip to the ball.

And that is when the stringing was made illegal because this made it produce even more spin far far more than anything else even what we have today.

slice bh compliment
09-18-2006, 05:34 PM
Once again that is only type the other had no more texture than regular string, it ends up being more open than any other pattern because it is not woven, so the string grip the ball and cup much more on the horizontal axis of the racket.

So finally both of you are right and hold truths, neither one of you have it 100% right.

And as you can see with the later SS they did indeed add stringing across (as you can see in red) to add more texture and grip to the ball.

And that is when the stringing was made illegal because this made it produce even more spin far far more than anything else even what we have today.

Oh yes, thank you so much for getting it one hundred percent right. Whew, the world needs three or four of you!!

jackson vile
09-18-2006, 05:42 PM
Oh yes, thank you so much for getting it one hundred percent right. Whew, the world needs three or four of you!!



Fine I'll leave you two morons to go on and on about how ignorant you guys areLOL

I gave historical artical along with pics, so blow it out your @$$ LOL:mrgreen:

slice bh compliment
09-18-2006, 05:57 PM
Fine I'll leave you two morons to go on and on about how ignorant you guys areLOL

I gave historical artical along with pics, so blow it out your @$$ LOL:mrgreen:

Dug the photo. Did not admire the selective view and of course...the condescension. Then you had to go and do that. Vile, Jackson. Vile. Pretty weak too.

Catch up with you later. All the best.
--slice

katarddx
09-18-2006, 06:38 PM
But that ignores the question:

why was the spaghetti string pattern so open?

Clearly it had to create more spin, otherwise they would have made it denser....no?
agreed, but also, i have seen spins coming of off spaghetys o crazy like you would not believe... you swing on the forehand size but ball somehow skips to the left on your backhand... it would drive me crazy!

katarddx
09-18-2006, 06:39 PM
PT - I think you're missing the point. The original string bed of the frame served as a platform for the spaghetti as it were. The rubber bands, twine, paper clips and other stuff that went into the spaghetti string job rode on top of the regular string bed and was tied to it. The other guys were right, the spaghetti on top of the string was what affected the spin of the ball. It also silenced the ball so you couldn't tell how hard it was hit. The spaghetti jobs I've seen (and they varied) consisted of a frame that had the same number of mains and crosses as a regularly strung frame with all this other stuff tied to it or affixed some how to it.
right on the money!

The Pusher Terminator
09-19-2006, 06:42 PM
Ok...you don't by the spaghetti string argument? Then How about this argument:
why did Woodford have the most open string pattern on the tour? I think he had only like 12 mains. He was able to create incredible spin.

I spoke to Roman over at r pny tennis (Agassi's stringer who helped Agassi win at the open by changing the tension by 1 pound...shees!). He said that Woodfords racquet created so much spin that Woodforde was the only one who could hit with it . Check it out:

http://editorial.gettyimages.com/source/search/details_pop.aspx?iid=1047282&cdi=0


and rabbit...you are dead wrong. The spaghetti jobs had the most open patterns on the planet. I think they had only like 6 cross strings. Check it out:

http://www.woodtennis.com/strings/t2000pasta.jpg

jmsx521
09-19-2006, 07:17 PM
Mark Woodforde had what you might call an open string pattern...
What was Woodforde's racket? Was it a customized Wilson? I remember seeing his racket 10 y. ago and ever since then I can't remember seeing a more-open string pattern than the one on his racket?

oiler90
09-19-2006, 07:30 PM
More strings that hit the ball the more spin you get. I don't care if you string it with rope. Its gonna bite better if there are more strings grabbin' on.

elee3
09-19-2006, 10:00 PM
I think the whole industry of selling strings would be completely wrong if more dense racquet = more spin because of more friction from the strings. Yes it is true, more contact = more friction. You can see it in racing from racing slicks where they don't have threads on tires for dry conditions. However thinner strings = more spin according to them, but thinner strings = less friction because smaller contact patch so how is it possible for thinner strings to produce more spin. I think it's obvious it is beyond just friction thats causing the spin. It's portions of the ball pushing pass the strings and those portions getting pushed in the vertical direction. Friction is a portion of force so friction is playing a minor role compared to the vertical force the strings are applying to portions of the ball. Read more if you want the details cause this is just a summary of what was suppose to be a short post exploding to a long one. ><












More strings = more friction true, but I believe more open string pattern = more spin because there is more than friction thats causing the ball to spin. If the tennis ball was a rigid round object that does not distort at all keeping the round shape at all times then I believe the dense string pattern will cause more spin.

Unfortunately the tennis ball is not a rigid metalic ball or something of that sort. The contact points to the strings are stopped right at where it meets the strings while the other portions of the ball try to continue moving pass the strings between the opennings made by the string pattern. Bigger the openings, larger portions of the ball are passing the strings between the opennings. Here's a lame MS paint image I drew of what I'm talking about, instead of a round tennis ball and a 16 main racquet I'm using a rectangular tennis ball with a 2 main racquet cause I suck at drawing on the computer. :(

http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g196/mitsuev04g63/strings.jpg

Since the force generated by friction is a portion of the vertical force on the ball, the spin is generated more by the vertical force of pushing the wedged portions of the ball upward. I believe this is the reason why a more open racquet generates more spin.

I can see another argument for more spin with more strings using this idea that more strings = more of that vertical force. I can say that the vertical force is going to be less for each string on the denser racquet because it is a round ball and each section of the ball that is passing the strings are smaller making it harder to achieve the 90 degree angle to achieve the maxium of the vertical force versus a more open racquet that allows larger portions to pass. It would be between would having the extra strings at the cost of lower vertical force per a string. To keep it simple think of a bed of nails, a dense bed of nails a person can sleep on it while a few nails will puncture the person.

travlerajm
09-19-2006, 11:19 PM
I think the whole industry of selling strings would be completely wrong if more dense racquet = more spin because of more friction from the strings. Yes it is true, more contact = more friction. You can see it in racing from racing slicks where they don't have threads on tires for dry conditions. However thinner strings = more spin according to them, but thinner strings = less friction because smaller contact patch so how is it possible for thinner strings to produce more spin. I think it's obvious it is beyond just friction thats causing the spin. It's portions of the ball pushing pass the strings and those portions getting pushed in the vertical direction. Friction is a portion of force so friction is playing a minor role compared to the vertical force the strings are applying to portions of the ball. Read more if you want the details cause this is just a summary of what was suppose to be a short post exploding to a long one. ><












More strings = more friction true, but I believe more open string pattern = more spin because there is more than friction thats causing the ball to spin. If the tennis ball was a rigid round object that does not distort at all keeping the round shape at all times then I believe the dense string pattern will cause more spin.

Unfortunately the tennis ball is not a rigid metalic ball or something of that sort. The contact points to the strings are stopped right at where it meets the strings while the other portions of the ball try to continue moving pass the strings between the opennings made by the string pattern. Bigger the openings, larger portions of the ball are passing the strings between the opennings. Here's a lame MS paint image I drew of what I'm talking about, instead of a round tennis ball and a 16 main racquet I'm using a rectangular tennis ball with a 2 main racquet cause I suck at drawing on the computer. :(

http://i56.photobucket.com/albums/g196/mitsuev04g63/strings.jpg

Since the force generated by friction is a portion of the vertical force on the ball, the spin is generated more by the vertical force of pushing the wedged portions of the ball upward. I believe this is the reason why a more open racquet generates more spin.

I can see another argument for more spin with more strings using this idea that more strings = more of that vertical force. I can say that the vertical force is going to be less for each string on the denser racquet because it is a round ball and each section of the ball that is passing the strings are smaller making it harder to achieve the 90 degree angle to achieve the maxium of the vertical force versus a more open racquet that allows larger portions to pass. It would be between would having the extra strings at the cost of lower vertical force per a string. To keep it simple think of a bed of nails, a dense bed of nails a person can sleep on it while a few nails will puncture the person.

Nice pictures. But sorry, this is incorrect. An open pattern gives more spin simply because an open pattern stringbed stretches more. The more strings there are, the more they resist lateral stretching. It has nothing to do with friction.

The Pusher Terminator
09-20-2006, 05:29 AM
I was giving my opinion based on Spaghetti strings and woodfords racquet that open string patterns give the most spin; However it is only an opinion. The real answer is

THERE IS NO ANSWER


The experts are all over the place on this topic. In fact I just read in : "The Physics and technology of tennis" by Brody & friends that spin has absolutely NOTHING to do with the strings but rather with racquet head speed!

The conservative wisdom and Roman' from R pny tennis feel that thinner strings give more spin as they create more "bite".

However in direct contention of that theory is a tennis magazine article that says thicker strings give more spin.

Furthermore even the question of tension is not answered. Experts are all over the place on whether tighter of looser strings give more spin. Brody feels that strings have nothing to do with spin at all but that tighter strings allow you to swing hard thereby creating more spin because of increased head speed.

If you look at racquets today like the Babolat aeropro, it has an open string pattern; however is the increased spin created by this open pattern or the aerodynamic shape of the racquet thereby creating increased headspeed which equals more spin?

Bottom line: The jury is still out on this issue.

The Pusher Terminator
09-20-2006, 05:33 AM
What was Woodforde's racket? Was it a customized Wilson? I remember seeing his racket 10 y. ago and ever since then I can't remember seeing a more-open string pattern than the one on his racket?

I believe he forst played with a snauwert h-10 or something like that. He then switched to Wilson and customized. He had it built for 12 holes on the mains etc etc. Also the holes were very wide because Woodforde used incredibly thick strings which I do not believe are even on the market.

Rabbit
09-20-2006, 08:59 AM
and rabbit...you are dead wrong. The spaghetti jobs had the most open patterns on the planet. I think they had only like 6 cross strings. Check it out:

http://www.woodtennis.com/strings/t2000pasta.jpg

No, I'm not. Had you bothered to read my post, you'd have seen that I wrote:

The spaghetti jobs I've seen (and they varied) consisted of a frame that had the same number of mains and crosses as a regularly strung frame with all this other stuff tied to it or affixed some how to it.

Now, I don't know about you, but to me, varied means that there was not set pattern. You show one picture of a T2000 strung up and voila! it's the defacto standard for all spaghetti stringing? I'm afraid not.

In the following example, the racket has the same number of mains and a different, or fewer, number of crosses:

http://www.whatsalltheracquet.com/archives/001984.php

This picture, that second one that I found, doesn't represent "the most open string pattern in the world". It clearly shows fewer crosses (you were right about that) . However, the stringing arrangement in this picture is different from the one you cited. So, while they are both examples of spaghetti stringing, they are very different from one another. The picture in my example appears to have a normal number of mains.

In my opinion, this example appears to be fairly dense. This then would imply that it's the content of what's on the strings and not the base structure underneath that account for the incredible spin created by these type string jobs.

The supporting article says that fewer cross strings were involved, but it also says that there were "3 planes of non-intersecting strings". The string job that I linked looks to be fairly dense in nature. The fewer crosses is a factor, but even more so is the stuff that's built on the original string plane.

This is also borne out in the ITF ruling. Had an open string bed alone been responsible for the unfair advantage, Mark Woodforde's racket would never have been allowed in tournament play. As it is, his frame was not seen as an unfair advantage. And, I can pretty much guarantee you that if it had been, other pros would have adopted it.

travlerajm
09-20-2006, 09:03 AM
I've posted many times to explain the mechanism of spaghetti strings. It has nothing to do with open string pattern. It has everything to do with the fact that the strings are not woven, so that the mains can stretch more in the lateral direction. It is a simiular mechanism to the one that helps the Luxilon technology give more spin. But with Luxilon, the added lateral movement is due to the slippery Teflon coating.

The Pusher Terminator
09-20-2006, 02:45 PM
Rabbit,

I truly am sorry but sadly you are mistaken. "Spaghetti strings" do not vary. The string job you posted is a poor imitation of Spaghetti strings. There were many imitations but there is only one authentic Vibibsberger racquet (A.K.A Spaghetti racquet) invented by the infamous Werner Fischer .

As far as Woodfore...I disagree. Spaghetti strings in my opinion were made illegal due to political reasons. For many centuries you could even play wih a spoon if you wanted to...so why were these strings really made illegal?

Bill Scanlon in "Bad news for Mcenroe" feels that it was purely political. You see nastase broke Vilas' clay court record with this contraption. Vilas and his coach Tiriac were very powerful people in the tennis world. They went nuts after the loss and loobbied very hard to make it illegal. At least this is Bill Scanlons opinion.

On the other hand Woodforde racquet didnt **** anyone off!

Rabbit
09-20-2006, 08:10 PM
Rabbit,

I truly am sorry but sadly you are mistaken. "Spaghetti strings" do not vary. The string job you posted is a poor imitation of Spaghetti strings. There were many imitations but there is only one authentic Vibibsberger racquet (A.K.A Spaghetti racquet) invented by the infamous Werner Fischer .

As far as Woodfore...I disagree. Spaghetti strings in my opinion were made illegal due to political reasons. For many centuries you could even play wih a spoon if you wanted to...so why were these strings really made illegal?

Bill Scanlon in "Bad news for Mcenroe" feels that it was purely political. You see nastase broke Vilas' clay court record with this contraption. Vilas and his coach Tiriac were very powerful people in the tennis world. They went nuts after the loss and loobbied very hard to make it illegal. At least this is Bill Scanlons opinion.

On the other hand Woodforde racquet didnt **** anyone off!

Unless Tiriac and Vilas lobbied the ITF overnight, then it didn't happen that way. You see, the string job was outlawed the next day.

Your contention was that Woodforde's open string job was equivalent to the original which clearly is a falsehood since it doesn't bear any resemblance.

Also, the string job that I referenced was also referenced on the ITF page. I don't know, but I might take their example as a valid one.

The Pusher Terminator
09-21-2006, 10:21 AM
Unless Tiriac and Vilas lobbied the ITF overnight, then it didn't happen that way. You see, the string job was outlawed the next day.

Your contention was that Woodforde's open string job was equivalent to the original which clearly is a falsehood since it doesn't bear any resemblance.

Also, the string job that I referenced was also referenced on the ITF page. I don't know, but I might take their example as a valid one.

Alas you are mistaken once again. The Spaghetti racquet was no9t made illegal the next day but was rather "suspended" the next day...and by the way...they did go crazy overnight...actually during the day. If you read carefully you will note that Vilas never actually even finished the match. He simply quit and stormed off the court after losing a set. He was so upset when he went into the locker room and cried to his coach. You have to understand that this was no ordinary match....it snapped Vilas' world record winning streak only broken by Nadal in 2006! Tiriac who is known for his temper made a bunch of telephone calls and threatened all sorts of things and : viola....the strings were suspended. Isn't that just a coincidence?...NOT!!!!

How do I know this? Bill Scanlon..."Bad news for Mcenroe". So if you don't agree then you can write to him...but please don't kill the messenger.

I never said that Woodfordes string job is the equivalent to the original spaghetti. In fact Woodfordes string job has absolutely nothing to do with a spaghetti string job.

The only reason I brought up woodforde is to show that he uses an open string job to get spin.

Finally, I am fully aware that this was on the ITF's web page. Everyone who knows anything about spaghetti strings knows that. But alas it is not the original Werner Fisher Vilsbiburger racquet (a.k.a spaghetti racquet) nor does the ITF claim it to be. I have spent a lot of money to get my hands on an original and they are very rare. Very few people actually have one.

eunjam
10-17-2006, 12:37 PM
here:

http://cgi.*********/VERY-RARE-Racquet-Strings-Spaghetti-Stringing-String_W0QQitemZ120042630531QQihZ002QQcategoryZ208 71QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

The Pusher Terminator
10-17-2006, 01:52 PM
here:

http://cgi.*********/VERY-RARE-Racquet-Strings-Spaghetti-Stringing-String_W0QQitemZ120042630531QQihZ002QQcategoryZ208 71QQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem

link does not work

jackson vile
10-17-2006, 02:08 PM
link does not work


yes it does, you have to think though

The Pusher Terminator
10-17-2006, 02:35 PM
yes it does, you have to think though

shall I click my heels together three times and say I wish that I was in kansas?

Big Boris
06-11-2007, 12:05 AM
The spin level is determined by the amount of deflection in the stringbed. An open pattern deflects more than a closed pattern. If you want to feel what a more open pattern would feel like, you can simply string your racquet looser with a thinner gauge.

A 17-g string at 55 lbs in an 18x20 pattern will be equivalent to a 16-g string at 60 lbs in a 16x18 pattern. This is because the total cross-sectional area of the stringbed will be about the same, and the degree of strain in the string will be about the same too. So the total deflection of the stringbed will be the same. The spin level and power level will be about the same too.

Hello Travler!

Seems like you have investigated and calculated this using scientific like methods - as usual. Correct, and do you still have the same conclusion.

I have problems volleying with my n6195 18/20 stringed with Cyberflash 1.25 at 20 kg. It is too dead, and I can not get proper feel and pace on bread and butter flat volleys towards the corners (low or high). Just the slightest of center hit and the stringbed is dead. However I love volleying with my PSC6195 16/18 which is strung with Pro Hurricane Tour 1.25 at 21 kg.

Pro H Tour 125 is about 256 on the "Stiffness scale". Cyberflash 125 is about 240. And I have Cyberflash 5% looser. Any tips where I should go next? BTW I dont think there is any Pro H Tour thinner than 1.25.

Thanks!

Alafter
06-11-2007, 02:09 AM
anyone ever try skipping holes to create a super open string pattern?
(e.g. taking the POS OS and just stringing everyone role in the mains &
crosses so that you end up with 8 crosses and about 9mains?)

ME ME! ME I DID IT!

Prince More Game MP, strung at 58 lbs, polylon 16g.

Results:
It didnt make a damn diffrerence. and in fact the string bed was uncontrollably whacked.