Wilson will shut down Vortex

[SFrazeur]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

You're right. Fewer crosses is nothing new. They had them back in the 1970's and it was called "spaghetti strings". They were quickly and promptly banned by the ITF for producing too much spin. So I don't see why they shouldn't ban this new racquet from Wilson. Oh, and they should ban ALL poly strings while they're at it for producing too much spin, which is the same reason they banned spaghetti strings 35 years ago.

And, no, my post was not tongue-in-cheek but quite serious.

Your post has more agenda than truth. I expect you know better about said stringing.

Spaghetti stringing
Stringing systems



According to the Rules of Tennis, "the hitting surface of the racket shall be flat and consist of a pattern of crossed strings connected to a frame and alternately interlaced or bonded where they cross" (rule 4a). This tends to limit the movement between strings and, thus, the spin imparted to the ball. This rule was introduced in 1978 in response to a stringing system patented the previous year (US Patent 4273331, 8 December 1977) which could generate almost twice as much spin as a conventionally-strung racket, dubbed 'spaghetti' stringing.

Spaghetti stringing is illegal because the main and cross strings are not interlaced (or bonded). Instead, the strings lie on parallel planes and are able to move with the aid of tubular sleeves, which act as bearings, see below.

The freedom of movement allows the strings to deflect within the plane of the hitting surface and so rotate the ball as they recoil. The result is that players can produce extreme spin with minimal effort.

[The Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by Justin-JP

A 16 x 15 pattern is nothing like a spaghetti string setup; I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion.

The less crosses the less friction, allowing the mains to move more freely. That's it, nothing too exciting or radical about that. If you've ever used a Wilson 95 16 x 18, you will know how lively and unpredictable that string bed can be; now take away three more crosses and you get a little more potential spin and even less consistent response from the string bed. Not something I'd be jumping to try and it's not like these patterns don't already exist, more or less.

Wilson are in the business of selling rackets, this is what they do and this how they hype the market. Obviously you fell for it and almost see this gimmick as an evolutionary jump similar to graphite or poly.

I'm jumping to try.

My vortex has 14x15 and I love it. But what's intriguing about the Wilson is its 16x15 .....less cross strings ......this allows the mains to move more freely and "snap" back at the ball.....sounds really cool.

[Bartelby]

I can't wait for linguine stringed racquets.

[The Dark Knight]

The 99s.....the s by the way stands for sweeeeeeeet!

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

I say - BAN IT NOW!!!

Are there no limits? What's next? A racquet that plays for you while you sit in the shade sipping an iced tea?

It's out of control. We need to go back to wood racquets and gut strings so that it's only the player himself that generates all the power and spin without all of this "technology" doing it for you. Or else how do we know who the better player REALLY is instead of just who's using the better technology/equipment? It should be YOU that's generating the spin, NOT your strings nor your racquet.

Relax. It is just a more open string pattern.

[Ronaldo]

Is it illegal to just skip a few crosses and create your own 14X8 racquet?

[ChicagoJack]

Originally Posted by The Dark Knight

My vortex has 14x15 and I love it. But what's intriguing about the Wilson is its 16x15 ..... less cross strings ......this allows the mains to move more freely and "snap" back at the ball.....sounds really cool.

Yes, that's exactly it. I was thinking out loud about a similar idea for more mains and fewer crosses back in January. Low inter string friction, increased spin etc...

tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=409992

Jack

[dmcb101]

I am fairly curious about these new frames as you may have guessed if you have seen some of my previous posts. I read about how they tested these frames and to me it seems hard to dispute the results that they found. I would be interested to see the results of all of their performance frames and see the difference in spin potential with all the same variables. It seems to me that these new Steam frames do actually produce more spin but a lot of people here believe it is a marketing scheme.

I am not easily swayed into believing marketing schemes but after reading the article that was posted on this forum it seems hard to deny that these racquets do actually produce more RPM's on the ball.

What are the Prince frames that supposedly have this type of technology? Anyone else have an opinion on whether it is actual technology or just a marketing scheme? Provide examples why you think so!

[sureshs]

Originally Posted by Ronaldo

Is it illegal to just skip a few crosses and create your own 14X8 racquet?

It seems it does not work and that was part of the Wilson research, I was told by a guy who knows. You need to redesign the whole racket.

[PBODY99]

To keep it legal you want the pattern to be fairly regular. By spacing out the drilling to evenly divided the cross string coverage, you should get the same type of response with whatever increased spin benefit. You don't get that by dropping a couple of the outside crosses.

[sureshs]

With lesser number of strings taking the load, will they break easier?

[dmcb101]

Originally Posted by sureshs

With lesser number of strings taking the load, will they break easier?

I think the idea is that the mains will move more because of less friction due to the decrease in cross strings. The increased movement will make the main strings rub more on the crosses and eventually they will break.

[Chotobaka]

Originally Posted by The Dark Knight

The 99s.....the s by the way stands for sweeeeeeeet!

In your case, it might just stand for "stupid". Ya dig?

[Ronaldo]

Originally Posted by PBODY99

To keep it legal you want the pattern to be fairly regular. By spacing out the drilling to evenly divided the cross string coverage, you should get the same type of response with whatever increased spin benefit. You don't get that by dropping a couple of the outside crosses.

Suggest skipping every other main and cross in the sweetspot where most balls are struck. The trampoline effect and uneven response has to be incredible. Maybe poly alleviates the problems. Anyone with a stringer should try it.

[ChicagoJack]

Originally Posted by Chotobaka

In your case, it might just stand for "stupid". Ya dig?

Uugh. Dude, what is your deal? Not the first time Ive seen you post stuff like this. It would be super awesome if you could back waaay offa the name calling.

-Jack

[Ronaldo]

Originally Posted by dmcb101

I think the idea is that the mains will move more because of less friction due to the decrease in cross strings. The increased movement will make the main strings rub more on the crosses and eventually they will break.

Can you tube the 1st four mains?

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by SFrazeur

Your post has more agenda than truth. I expect you know better about said stringing.

Anything that increases spin should be banned - doesn't matter what it is or what the technology is. Spin should come from your technique and hard practice and not from your racquet or your strings.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Bartelby

I can't wait for linguine stringed racquets.

Actually, next will be the lasagna stringed racquets.

[themitchmann]

Originally Posted by Ronaldo

Suggest skipping every other main and cross in the sweetspot where most balls are struck. The trampoline effect and uneven response has to be incredible. Maybe poly alleviates the problems. Anyone with a stringer should try it.

That wouldn't be legal. The stringbed cannot be less dense in the center than the rest of the pattern. Therefore, you need to completely redesign the racquet/string pattern.

Also, the only pics I've seen online of one of the new Prince racquets has a 16x16 pattern. Being used by Antonia Lottner.

[The Dark Knight]

Originally Posted by Ronaldo

Suggest skipping every other main and cross in the sweetspot where most balls are struck. The trampoline effect and uneven response has to be incredible. Maybe poly alleviates the problems. Anyone with a stringer should try it.

Actually you want to reduce the trampoline effect.

The trampoline effect is what causes a loss of control but gives power.

By reducing the number of cross strings you have less trampoline effect and more spin and control.


Think of it this way.....if you had only mains and no crosses you would have great spin but little trampoline effect.

The spaghetti racquets had enormous spin but no power. By reducing the crosses Wilson has created less power /trampoline and more spin through the mains moving. Power comes from the crosses and spin comes from the mains.

Less power with more spin will allow you to swing harder and still control the ball. Without the trampoline effect you can swing hard....racket head spead is another factor in spin.