Does an arm friendly racket with poly make sense?

[BMC9670]

I'm a relative newbie when it come to this stuff so please go easy on me if this is a stupid question....

Would it make any sense to use a poly string with an arm friendly racket like a PK 5G or Prince Ozone Tour as a way to have the benefits of a poly without tearing up your elbow/arm? I'm hearing great things about the power, control, and durability of poly, but that it's really hard on the arm.

Would one one offset the advantages of the other?

[jrod]

Possibly, but quite frankly, poly or co-poly's are not a good idea if you have any issues with TE or GE. In addition, they are not very econmical since they all die rather quickly and you end up either replacing them often or playing with dead strings which is not exactly a good idea. Finally, many club players don't really have the game to benefit from poly in the same way pro's benefit....you really have to take a big cut at the ball to get the most out of poly or else you're not really benefiting from the string's unique properties.

Just my $0.02.

[goran_ace]

This may just be my preference, but I'm more comfortable playing with poly hybrid at a low tension in a more arm-friendly frame than I am playing with synthetic gut in a not so arm-friendly frame.

[fuzz nation]

I concur with jrod.

An arm friendly frame already has more control if it has extra flex - my limited experience is that this idea is rather counter-productive, at least when you're talking about a rather soft racquet. I've only sampled poly or kevlar strings here and there, but it seems to me that an already soft and sort of dead frame doesn't benefit from dead strings (poly and kevlar have almost no resilience). Keeping an arm friendly frame strung with softer stuff seems to be both easier on the arm and better for the racquet's performance.

I've never had anything more than an occasional twinge from a test drive with a different racquet, but I did try a "soft" poly hybrid recently in one of my softest, heaviest, most arm friendly frames. I even had the poly in the crosses with a multifiber in the mains. It played harsh for me and the racquets overall performance seemed to be generally diminished. Although I was quite familiar with this racquet, I was a little sore after using it with this setup, so I cut the stuff out. Knowledge is power I guess.

[BMC9670]

Thanks, Guys. I'm currently using what's reviewed as a soft multi-filament in my PK 5G and I like it. Just wondering if I'm missing out on anything with all the talk of poly's. Never tried one.

I've had just minor TE in the past, but none with my current setup. I do have a bum shoulder, though.

[BigT]

It would make sense if you have full, fast strokes. Then you can benefit from the control polys offer.

[Jagman]

jrod stated:

Possibly, but quite frankly, poly or co-poly's are not a good idea if you have any issues with TE or GE. In addition, they are not very econmical since they all die rather quickly and you end up either replacing them often or playing with dead strings which is not exactly a good idea. Finally, many club players don't really have the game to benefit from poly in the same way pro's benefit....you really have to take a big cut at the ball to get the most out of poly or else you're not really benefiting from the string's unique properties.

Spot on. I would say, however, that if you are a consistent player and big hitter, poly strings are worth the ride, at least once. There is nothing like the sensation of going all out and feeling that you just can't miss. But, as jrod points out, poly dies so fast that it becomes cost prohibitive to use it all the time. Think about how many times pros change racquets during a match; sometimes strings break, sometimes they want a different tension, but far more frequently, they need a fresh set of poly.

With the harsher, or stiffer polys, I've found that they (or I) need a break-in period of about an hour. They can be fairly board-like at first, but then overall playability improves markedly. That can be quite frustrating with a string life measured in hours, and is even more constraining economically. I don't prestretch poly when stringing; maybe that would alleviate or eliminate the need for a break-in period.

To more directly respond to the OP, I think I too, intuitively consider putting poly in a flexible frame as being at cross purposes. Yet, my own experience with poly --- which has generally been good --- is in stiff frames at high tension. Even experimenting with poly at low tension in stiff frames has not been bad. However, when I pick up a flexible frame --- which I do from time to time --- I am in search of that smooth, buttery feeling that I would usually find with a softer string.

If you decide to try poly in a PK, tell us about the experience. It would be interesting to see whether conventional wisdom prevails. I would caution, however, if you do decide to try poly, that it can be difficult to tell precisely when the string begins to die. I will generally start to feel it in the arm (discomfort) before I notice a deterioration in playability. Don't leave it in too long.

Cheers!

[jrod]

Originally Posted by Jagman

.......

To more directly respond to the OP, I think I too, intuitively consider putting poly in a flexible frame as being at cross purposes. Yet, my own experience with poly --- which has generally been good --- is in stiff frames at high tension. Even experimenting with poly at low tension in stiff frames has not been bad. However, when I pick up a flexible frame --- which I do from time to time --- I am in search of that smooth, buttery feeling that I would usually find with a softer string.

.....

Need to be a little careful here when talking about the flex rating. Some frames are flexible yet have a firmer stringbed response. My current frame (PB10mid) is one that has an RDC rating of 59, yet the stringbed plays more like low to mid 60's. In this case, a firm string brightens the response considerably.

[Jagman]

jrod stated:

Need to be a little careful here when talking about the flex rating. Some frames are flexible yet have a firmer stringbed response. My current frame (PB10mid) is one that has an RDC rating of 59, yet the stringbed plays more like low to mid 60's. In this case, a firm string brightens the response considerably.

Good to know. I am finding that you can get yourself in trouble with too broadly based assumptions.

Especially where polys are concerned, it seems that conventional wisdom, if you will, may not be entirely correct. For example, polys strung at low tensions seem to provide a great deal of power that is still controllable. Whether this is a good thing however, seems to depend on the player resisting the urge to hit out on everything and continuing to employ percentage tennis.

By the way, I have noticed some posters beginning to refer more to stringbed stiffness, as opposed to frame stiffness when discussing the playability of various setups. Given the occasional odd parsing of English, I would suspect that some of the authors are non-English speakers, primarily. Would this apply to the distinction you made? And if you know, is this something that is taking on more importance in Europe, let's say, as opposed to the States?

[ClubHoUno]

If you want to test and use a CoPoly, then try a hybrid of a good multi in the mains (X-One, Xcel, Isospeed Pro or a cheaper goes multi) @ 58-59 lbs tension and then hybrid it with one of the new softer CoPolys in the crosses (Hyperion, Tornado, BlackCode, Turbotwist, HeptaTwist, FocusHex, Silverstring, SPPPP, PROLINE II) @ 54-55 lbs tension.

This will give you the feel and power of a soft good multi and the control and firmer feel of a CoPoly in the crosses. Plays really good, you should give it a try at least.

[jrod]

Originally Posted by Jagman

.....By the way, I have noticed some posters beginning to refer more to stringbed stiffness, as opposed to frame stiffness when discussing the playability of various setups. Given the occasional odd parsing of English, I would suspect that some of the authors are non-English speakers, primarily. Would this apply to the distinction you made? And if you know, is this something that is taking on more importance in Europe, let's say, as opposed to the States?

I'm not aware of what other posters are saying, or how they are saying it. What I do know is that the RDC stiffness rating doesn't accurately reflect the flex of the stringbed alone. I'm not sure what is emphasized in the measurement, but I suspect it is some aggregate that is heavily influenced by longitudinal flex (i.e. head to butt). My sense is the flex of just the stringbed can be obscured and as a result, the assumption that a low flex rating translates to a soft stringbed isn't always accurately.

As an example, I used to play with a Fischer Mpro No.1 98 which has a flex rating 58 (from what I recall). This is nearly identical to my current frame the Volkl PB10mid. The difference in the stringbed response between these two frames is stark, with the Fischer best characterized as noodle-like up top, whereas the PB10mid is considerably firmer in the hoop. Both frames are rather forgiving longitudinally, but the PB10mid provides more power and better control when driving the ball (i.e. flattening out your strokes).

I suspect TW's racquet expert will eventually post data that either backs up my claims or refutes them. Until then, that's my story and I'm sticking to it....

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by BMC9670

Thanks, Guys. I'm currently using what's reviewed as a soft multi-filament in my PK 5G and I like it. Just wondering if I'm missing out on anything with all the talk of poly's. Never tried one.

I've had just minor TE in the past, but none with my current setup. I do have a bum shoulder, though.

You're not missing out on anything but arm and shoulder pain. Polys have no resiliency and no power. They also have no feel and die quickly. They are as stiff as barbed wire. Unless you're a pro, I'd say they are inappropriate for 99% of recreational players. If you have ever had TE, I'd stay far, far away from any polys. They are not worth the comfort and power you get from multis and syn guts.

[stanfordtennis alum]

all would depend on your strokes but it should be fine.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by jrod

I'm not aware of what other posters are saying, or how they are saying it. What I do know is that the RDC stiffness rating doesn't accurately reflect the flex of the stringbed alone. I'm not sure what is emphasized in the measurement, but I suspect it is some aggregate that is heavily influenced by longitudinal flex (i.e. head to butt). My sense is the flex of just the stringbed can be obscured and as a result, the assumption that a low flex rating translates to a soft stringbed isn't always accurately.

As an example, I used to play with a Fischer Mpro No.1 98 which has a flex rating 58 (from what I recall). This is nearly identical to my current frame the Volkl PB10mid. The difference in the stringbed response between these two frames is stark, with the Fischer best characterized as noodle-like up top, whereas the PB10mid is considerably firmer in the hoop. Both frames are rather forgiving longitudinally, but the PB10mid provides more power and better control when driving the ball (i.e. flattening out your strokes).

I suspect TW's racquet expert will eventually post data that either backs up my claims or refutes them. Until then, that's my story and I'm sticking to it....

The racquets' stiffness ratings (RA) do not measure the stringbed stiffness at all. It only measures the frame's stiffness and more so the area around the throat than the ends of the frame. This is why you can have a frame that has a high stiffness rating but that feels much flexier in actual play because it has a more flexible hoop. The PS 6.0 95 is a good example. Although its stiffness is rated at RA 67, it feels more like it should be RA 61 or 62 in actual play due to its flexy hoop and open string pattern.

So, yes, stringbed stiffness and frame stiffness are two completely separate things. A dense (e.g., 18x20) string pattern will almost always feel stiffer than a more open pattern (e.g., 16x18 ) at the same tension even if the frames themselves are the same.

[Jagman]

Good info, jrod and Breakpoint. Playing mostly with stiffer frames of a similar type, that's a distinction I would not likely have noted otherwise. You can learn something new on TT --- maybe not everyday, but often enough.

Thanks!