View Single Post
Old 07-28-2012, 11:53 AM   #23
ginoC
New User
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4
Default

New to the board, but have strung for near 20 years. I've thought about this subject many times, and believe that Glen K approach is the most practical, i.e. measure your frame before and after stringing to see what's really going on. For me, the intent of using different tensions should be to ensure that the mains and crosses work uniformly. Noting that typically the Xs are 20-25% shorter than the Ms, it would seem that reducing the tension on the Xs makes sense. However, there's the matter of tension losses at the crossovers and at the frame. How much is anybody's guess, and is why I endorsed Glen K's approach. Also keep in mind that as you string the Xs, you're actually increasing the tension of the mains as the mains being forced to go over and under the Xs. There used to be a stringing machine called TruTension whose design intent was to reduce/minimize all aforementioned tension losses. It specified a significant tension reduction when doing the Xs to account for the shorter length. I'm not a big fan of hybrid stringing unless you string your racket after every match like the top pros do, since, as mentioned previously by others, the tension loss of the Ms and Xs will be uneven-- what is perfect when freshly strung will become less and less perfect the longer you play with it. Recommend most regular players stay with a full bed of whatever.
ginoC is offline   Reply With Quote