View Single Post
Old 08-01-2011, 04:12 AM   #25
Datacipher
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 4,622
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TimothyO View Post
The 100" Speed MP 18x20 has the same string density as the 16 main 93" PB10 Mid as measured across the 12 center mains. I enjoy both frames for the level of control they offer. They feel pretty darn precise. The PB10 Mid is certainly spin friendly but the MP18x20 definitely has the edge in that department. the PB10 Mid feels more powerful to me. The result is that I enjoy both frames with the PB10 Mid generating deeper, lower, faster shots and the MP 18x20 generating spinnier, safer, but somewhat slower shots for the same stroke.
Timothy...you aren't hitting the ball with the same stroke. If everything else is equal, frames will not make this big a difference. The only equipment factor that would ultimately make this kind of difference is stringbed tension.

HOWEVER, setting that aside for the moment, let's pretend that you did hit it exactly the same way as you say. Totally different shots were produced. Yet the string density is the same. String density would not be the important differentiating factor then would it?

Now, indeed, you have made an observation that has held....well just about forever....differing string patterns, will yield different densities in the middle of the racquet. And indeed, if you're hitting it outside the middle 12, it's not going to be a high quality shot anyways. So, from a purely academic standpoint, I agree 100% that if somebody wanted to know about string density, a measure of the inner strings would be more valuable, but the reason you probably haven't seen a big fuss about this is because the vast vast vast majority of highly accomplished players, couldn't give a bucket of snakes about this.

TimothyO, I will get a lot of flack for being a gear-headed party-pooper here....and believe me, I get it. It's fun, even addictive to play with your equipment and look for magical solutions. Heck, that's really what the equipment forums are all about....making up new laws of physics...ridiculous weighting theories unfounded in science or real-world experience etc...

...and to each their own. Micro-tinkering with equipment, and fantasy theories are a hobby unto themselves, and if one wants to engage in it, and they enjoy it, well there are a lot of worse things to do!

But I say this to you knowing you are relatively new to tennis...and obviously have an avid interest in playing it....this is all BS. You have almost 700 posts, devoted largely to strings, racquets, etc. You were even so worried about a .2 oz difference in a frame, you were worried TW ripped you off. I say this altruistically, though take it as you will: the single biggest thing that will hold back your game, is your focus on equipment. Especially at the level you're showing here, and is commonly seen on these boards. At your level...though really, at ALL levels, it's completely trivial. Get a decent racquet that feels OK to you. Stick with it, and stop thinking about it. Play.

Yes, pretty unsexy advice for gearheads, but it is the real truth.

I will say again, that is only if improving your game is your primary concern....if hanging out on the string forum, and/or tinkering with your gear, and dreaming of the next big string/racquet "score" is how you have fun...by all means, go for it!
Datacipher is offline   Reply With Quote