Talk Tennis

Talk Tennis (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/index.php)
-   Stringing Techniques / Stringing Machines (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/forumdisplay.php?f=23)
-   -   Stringing Tecniques (http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=442743)

pkshooter 10-11-2012 09:04 PM

Stringing Tecniques
 
I don't understand, how you can string a racket in different ways. :confused:
can someone explain to me the diff methods and what they do.

pkshooter 10-11-2012 09:08 PM

thank you in advance

drakulie 10-11-2012 09:33 PM

one piece, two piece, around the world (numerous kinds), proportional, etc, etc, etc.

diredesire 10-12-2012 07:39 AM

There's also the JET method that is worth at least knowing (I don't ever use it, though). With those "keywords" in mind, a search should give you a very brief overview of what they are.

Very brief summaries:

One Piece: One long length of string, which results in two knots.
Two Piece: Two pieces of string, one for M, one for X: Results in 4 knots
Proportional: Tension changes with the length of string, outside is looser. Supposedly expands the sweetspot, reduces jarring on off center strokes.
Box: Sort of like ATW, except you make a box pattern on the frame (http://www.stringerspad.com/atwqbox.html)
JET: Combination of Proportional and Box (like I said, simplified summary). IMHO largely marketing.

If you want to know more than a simple summary, start using that search function, OR google (keyword site:tt.tennis-warehouse.com). I'm assuming you're not really a stringer due to your question, so if you have any specific questions about the process and how they relate to the above, please ask (specific) questions. I won't speak for everyone, but the impression I get is the techniques forum isn't really all about the traditional spoon feeding that you might get elsewhere.

pkshooter 10-13-2012 08:31 AM

No I string and I know the difference between one piece and to piece but that's it

Ramon 10-13-2012 10:54 AM

Read the stickies in this forum. You can learn a lot just looking at the videos, seeing how the different string patterns are done, and listening to their explanations.

TimothyO 10-13-2012 04:04 PM

I raised a related question in this section and the string section. People are all over the map on the subject.

Some say just string all strings a the specified reference tension.

Others add 10% tension to 2-4 of the outside mains and 2-4 of the top and bottom crosses.

There are the JayCee and closely related but still distinct JET method.

There's proportional stringing which varies tension based on string length and vibration frequency.

And lots of others. All share a common goal of a more even, longer lasting string bed with fewer hot spots and more consistent response.

Related issues included pre-stretching gut and multis (or not) and letting polys relax several seconds before clamping off (as much as 20 seconds).

My question, as a customer, arose due to the fact that customers who might have their stringing done by different individuals or even different shops with very different results. There's even one fellow who replied to my post who sort of dismissed the idea but then said he'll string using whatever technique a customer specs and if they don't he'll string as he does for himself...but he never explains what that way is!

TimothyO 10-13-2012 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by drakulie (Post 6949611)
one piece, two piece, around the world (numerous kinds), proportional, etc, etc, etc.

When you string for pros do you just pull reference tension on each string, do soemthing else for specific strings, or use something like JET?

drakulie 10-13-2012 05:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimothyO (Post 6953345)
When you string for pros do you just pull reference tension on each string, do soemthing else for specific strings, or use something like JET?

No player from beginner to grand slam champion has ever mentioned the JET method to me. To be frank, I won't do it for anyone unless I'm being paid twice or even three times what I typically charge.

Doesnt matter what pattern you use, you will ultimately end up with a string bed stiffness. The JET method doesn't come anywhere near what it claims, and is simply a variation of a proportional pattern. Period. It's a egomaniacs way of making himself feel special. Anyone can come up with a variation of a proportional pattern and name it after themsleves.

Squidward 10-13-2012 06:27 PM

One Piece (two knot), Two Piece (four knot) and ATW. Pretty much all my customers ask for and all I use.

I've NEVER had anyone ask for a Jet or proportional stringjob...

pkshooter 10-14-2012 06:40 AM

What's atw, and is the jet method worth learning.

Roger Wawrinka 10-14-2012 07:15 AM

^^ ATW pattern's are a way to string one piece but still being able to string the crosses from top to bottom. This is used for racquets where the mains end at the bottom of the racquet, otherwise if the mains end at the head of the racquet, you could string one piece and string top to bottom.


I do not know if you know this but stringing bottom to top is kind of frowned upon.

Ramon 10-14-2012 07:59 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pkshooter (Post 6954659)
What's atw, and is the jet method worth learning.

As was mentioned before, no one is going to ask you to use the JET method. ATW is useful if you want to do one-piece patterns. Most racquets today require an ATW pattern to do a one-piece job doing the crosses from top to bottom. The reasons you might want to use one-piece include conserving string if you use reels and putting less wear on the grommets because you have only two tie-offs. I don't particularly like the traditional one-piece pattern where one of the end mains is loose because it's a tie-off while the other side is tight. I usually modify it by weaving a cross with the short side, which eliminates the unevenness.

If you want to learn ATW, look at the videos in the stickies.

Roger Wawrinka 10-14-2012 09:51 AM

^ That's a great idea with the one-piece string job. Using the short side to weeve a cross. I will have to try that!:)

Irvin 10-14-2012 10:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Wawrinka (Post 6955009)
^ That's a great idea with the one-piece string job. Using the short side to weeve a cross. I will have to try that!:)

I bet you don't.

EDIT: Try it and you'll see what I mean.

Irvin 10-14-2012 10:14 AM

Double post

Ramon 10-14-2012 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Wawrinka (Post 6955009)
^ That's a great idea with the one-piece string job. Using the short side to weeve a cross. I will have to try that!:)

I didn't come up with the idea myself. I got it from one of the stringing forums. It's the place with all the guts and all the glory. :lol:

Rabbit 10-14-2012 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Roger Wawrinka (Post 6955009)
^ That's a great idea with the one-piece string job. Using the short side to weeve a cross. I will have to try that!:)

I usually try to weave the first two on the short side then tie off on the 3rd cross which is started from the long side. I like it better.

Ramon 10-14-2012 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rabbit (Post 6955157)
I usually try to weave the first two on the short side then tie off on the 3rd cross which is started from the long side. I like it better.

I've done that also. It depends on the racquet. With some racquets you have a stressful 270 degree turn if you only weave one cross with the short side. Weaving two crosses sometimes helps to spread out that stress. If you do it that way, of course, you need to reserve an extra 2 feet for the short side.

stringwalla 10-14-2012 01:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramon (Post 6954794)
by weaving a cross with the short side

That's how the players get it at some grand slams and other tournaments-


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:07 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2006 - Tennis Warehouse