# Drawback Again

Discussion in 'Stringing Techniques / Stringing Machines' started by Imago, Sep 30, 2013.

1. ### ShroudHall of Fame

Joined:
Apr 17, 2013
Messages:
4,113
Location:
Bay Area
Man I guess I dont get it. If there is no relation between tension and drawback then why is he concerned?

Look at his post its all about tension and it being off reference. I think I mention this in #2. IMHO that is exactly what you are saying and as I read it missing the point that the string will never be at reference tension is the reason he went down this path at solve drawback?

2. ### eelhcHall of Fame

Joined:
Jan 21, 2013
Messages:
1,710
What in the world did I just walk into?

3. ### IrvinG.O.A.T.

Joined:
Mar 15, 2007
Messages:
12,467
Location:
Marietta, Ga
I did not say there was no relationship between tension and drawback. As a matter of fact there is. But he measures the tension of a tensioned string. Then he clamps the string, releases tension and sees drawback. Then he measures tension again. Surely as the clamp draws back 2-3 mm there will be tension loss. The tension loss is how he quantifies the drawback.

4. ### ImagoSemi-Pro

Joined:
Aug 28, 2013
Messages:
550
Location:
Sofia, BG
There is no big difference if I clamp close to the frame or 1 inch away, as in both cases we clamp from inside the frame and there is still the grommet friction to be overcome in the next tension pull. More important is not to allow these 3 mm drawback to occur.

Just got a friend's racket strung yesterday by a professional (20 years) stringer @ 23/22 kg. Calibrated the stringmeter and guess what it shows - 22 kg for the mains and 16 kg for the crosses. These are 5 kg differential loss (better lack) of tension.

5. ### diredesireSuper Moderator

Joined:
Mar 16, 2004
Messages:
6,744
1) Sure, but everyone has those problems. It's not truly the heart of this thread (besides the accurate understanding of the problem)

2) There ARE measuring devices that can measure actual tension on a string, but generally speaking, they don't really work when the string is woven. MY issue isn't with chasing the tail, it's the fact that the quantifying is done on a device that shouldn't be used for 'absolute' (not reference) tension measurements.

3) Yes.

4) Uh, sure, but then you're fiddling with reference tension. That's the whole purpose of the word reference. You choose a number that correlates with a string bed stiffness, and nothing more. The number is actually meaningless. You could use a color scale (green to red, green being low) and ask for "orange," and when you say orange, in YOUR mind you have a stiffness associated with that word. You go to a different stringer, and they return a racquet that feels like a yellow. Well, what does that mean? You bump your tension closer to red. That's it. People fixate on numbers and they fall prey to their own "smarts" over their feel.

6) ? I'm not sure what you mean here. You can't do this proposed method on the mains.

Anectodal 'evidence' is actually not doing anything to support your claims, at least from a rhetoric standpoint. I'm going to point something out here: If the "close to the frame or 1" from the frame" argument was indeed true, can't we extrapolate this and say: "it doesn't matter if I clamp near the frame on the near (to the tensioner) side, or far side -- as long as there's no drawback? Obviously the length of string that is not under tension matters... There's going to be friction regardless of pull, that is true... BUT! This friction implies that the (previously) untensioned length of string will be lower than the following string (ignore the word "reference" here, because it is entirely irrelevant). If you have a longer length of string (3" trail vs .2" trail) at "50 lbs" when you're pulling the next string at "60 lbs" (actual tension doesn't matter), then when you release the previous string clamp, a 3" length of string @ ~50 lbs would "equalize" across the previous cross string, vs a .2" length of string @ ~50lbs. Which do you think will have the higher impact on overall tension?

To be fair, the effects of above are largely, largely exaggerated (perhaps on the order of 2x orders of magnitude), but for argument's sake, and to paint a clearer picture...

Also, if you're going to insist on using anecdotal evidence to reinforce your claim, please explain how you are "calibrating" a stringmeter. Are you using a reference source to gauge tension? How is this reference source calibrated? Are the string types the same between your reference source and this professionally strung racquet? When I look at a stringmeter, I see: gauge indicators... that's pretty much it.

6. ### IrvinG.O.A.T.

Joined:
Mar 15, 2007
Messages:
12,467
Location:
Marietta, Ga
Did you ever stop to think this could all be by design? Pulling the crosses through the mains creates a lot of surface friction and the crosses will not be pulled at reference tension anyway. The mains are longer so proportionally they should be strung tighter than the crosses. But if you like the feel of tighter crosses by all means string your racket the way you want to string it. Many players (even professionals) drop the cross string tension even more.

EDIT: I may be wrong but it would seem to me that if the mains were strung at the same tension as the crosses (or proportional looser) they would slide around more, break faster, and provide less spin and control.

Last edited: Oct 14, 2013
7. ### ImagoSemi-Pro

Joined:
Aug 28, 2013
Messages:
550
Location:
Sofia, BG
Irvin got it right that within any sphere of relativity, there are absolute laws. My criterion (measuring tool) is absolute when its relativity is taken into brackets. I don't use two measuring tools, I use ONE and the same tool calibrated for the exact gauge (not just 16 or 17, but 16,5 or 17,2 - whatever the gauge fork shows). It is anecdotal that such simple methodology is beyond the grasp of adult and supposedly well educated people.

8. ### struggleHall of Fame

Joined:
Mar 4, 2010
Messages:
4,298
Location:
Western North Carolina
you have input from several experienced stringers coming at you, but you just want to keep refuting all of it.

at this point i can only assume that you may just have found the better way. kudos.

9. ### diredesireSuper Moderator

Joined:
Mar 16, 2004
Messages:
6,744
So what you're saying is that it isn't at all absolute? My point is that the 'calibration' is at best an eyeballing, unless there is more to it than I think -- which is what I asked for in the previous post. I didn't insult you or call your 'education' into question. I wasn't rude or condescending in my post -- anecdotal evidence from the standpoint of rhetoric does not further your argument. That's all I'm saying -- if you are trying to convince me your methodology is better than an industry accepted practice, I need an explanation why. I'm not sure why you're being rude... I haven't insulted you once in this thread.

Edit: I should mention that I don't dispute your relative measurements, but the language in this thread suggests that reference and relative and absolute are being misunderstood. I think this is a point that NEEDS to be resolved before any useful discussion takes place. If we're all talking about the same thing, but using different terminology, that isn't going to be very productive.

Last edited: Oct 16, 2013
10. ### IrvinG.O.A.T.

Joined:
Mar 15, 2007
Messages:
12,467
Location:
Marietta, Ga
There is no calibration to it.here is a picture of the Stringmeter.

I think the calibration Imago is talking about is just setting the gauge. At the 11 o'clock position in the picture there is a string gauge sticking out. You slide those gauge 'fingers' over the string and it is hard to see but there are gauge marking on the fingers. You then like up the white arrow below the gauge to the appropriate gauge by twisting the outside ring. There are two pins you can't see in the opposite side. You put them over the string intersection and twist either a main or cross to measure 'tension.' But even Uniquesports (new owner of the Stringmeter) says even though the gauge does come close to measuring tension it is better for determining relative tension loss in the racket. Here is a picture of the pins on the back placed on the strings.There are actually three different sections on the Stringmeter one for pounds in a strung racket, one for pounds for a free string, and one for KG in a strung racket.

11. ### diredesireSuper Moderator

Joined:
Mar 16, 2004
Messages:
6,744
Thanks for the write up, Irvin -- this will definitely help in getting my point across. I'm familiar with the device, which is why I'm asking these questions. While yes, I'm happy to accept relative measurements (cross vs. main) CAN be measured relative to one another -- the string meter is still not really designed for that!

My personal viewpoint is that even if you're deliberate and careful about this measurement, there's still a lot of variability that is possible due to (even experienced) user error. The tool is a little inaccurate to be making these types of factual claims. Unless, of course, there's something OP is doing that can improve the accuracy or repeatability -- which is the real question I'm trying to pose.

12. ### IrvinG.O.A.T.

Joined:
Mar 15, 2007
Messages:
12,467
Location:
Marietta, Ga
I agree with you DD.

13. ### struggleHall of Fame

Joined:
Mar 4, 2010
Messages:
4,298
Location:
Western North Carolina
Agreed. The Stringmeter has it's place, but it's not in the place of scientific claims.

I've measured 16 v 17 (same string) on a couple brands and they essentially measured the same using the forky thingie.

I have one and use it "regularly" and you're gonna tell me you are measuring 16.2, 16.5 etc??

ok.
just don't tell someone this, based on such:
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showpost.php?p=7838874&postcount=8

Last edited: Oct 23, 2013
14. ### ProStringingRookie

Joined:
Dec 27, 2012
Messages:
125
Location:
London, UK
You also have to remember that the arrow to help setting the string gauge is just a sticker:

The sticker eventually falls off as well and requires re-application, so setting the stringmeter to accurately allow for tenths of a string gauge is a pretty far fetched.

The product is, however, suitable for measuring tension loss.

ProStringing

15. ### ImagoSemi-Pro

Joined:
Aug 28, 2013
Messages:
550
Location:
Sofia, BG
Or tension difference between mains and crosses...

Come on, guys, apply little dialectics to your frozen metaphysical thinking.

16. ### WikkyRookie

Joined:
Mar 7, 2012
Messages:
272
Location:
Alpharetta, GA
From what I can tell you have about.... 50+ years of stringing experience and 50,000+ racquets strung telling you something, but you're still saying they're wrong?

Don't try to reinvent the wheel, just string the racquet.

17. ### ImagoSemi-Pro

Joined:
Aug 28, 2013
Messages:
550
Location:
Sofia, BG
Calibration again.

You pull 26 kg, clamp the string and set the pointer to a gauge that will show 26 kg sharp when string appears in the fork.

18. ### struggleHall of Fame

Joined:
Mar 4, 2010
Messages:
4,298
Location:
Western North Carolina
so now you are using the stringmeter as a calibration tool?

ok.

go for it.

19. ### IrvinG.O.A.T.

Joined:
Mar 15, 2007
Messages:
12,467
Location:
Marietta, Ga
And I didn't think this thread could get any worse.

20. ### ImagoSemi-Pro

Joined:
Aug 28, 2013
Messages:
550
Location:
Sofia, BG
How did you get to this weird idea? I clearly said - I pull 26 kg and calibrate the stringmeter to show 26 kg so that when I pul 22 kg for the crosses, the stringmeter will show 22 kg. It's is as simple as that. When I finish the stringing I measure again the tension and the mains show 28 kg, while the crosses show 17 kg. There is absolute loss of tension in the crosses measured in a proper and scientifically vindicated way.

Last edited: Oct 25, 2013
21. ### SFrazeurLegend

Joined:
Mar 26, 2006
Messages:
6,485
Location:
Arkansas

Notice how he is clamping off next to the frame?

It is easy to get the 1-1 tension pulling in a straight line: if it pulls 50 pounds on a straight line of string then it has 50 pounds of tension. However, when you clamp off in the middle of the frame and you pull tension on the next main or cross the tensioner has to do so on a bend with a lot of friction so that quarter or half a length of string is not getting full tension.

If you are getting so much draw back then something is wrong with the machine or user. Check the clamp head and the swivel base. You may have solved one problem with two clamps but you have created another one in return.

22. ### IrvinG.O.A.T.

Joined:
Mar 15, 2007
Messages:
12,467
Location:
Marietta, Ga
Even when pulling on the center strings you will not have full reference tension on the center string. With a stringing machine that has 360* rotation it must be pulling down from below the frame so ther is surface friction at the downward bend and therefore tension loss.