mono vs. poly???

[uncooling]

I'm getting confused between these two terms.

Do you know which one gives more power+pop on your serve, and which one gives more spin?

thanks!!

[fortun8son]

Most polys are monofilament with very few exceptions.
Some people will refer to synthetic gut as mono because of the monofilament nylon core as opposed to multi.
Mono is the structure, poly is the material (polyester)

As if this wasn't confusing enough, there is polyamide(nylon), polypropoline, and polyurethane.

Most people mean polyester or co-polymer polyester when they say poly.

In general, polyester has more spin and nylon(both mono and multi) has more power.

[Say Chi Sin Lo]

Technique.

Just trying to save you the trouble of making 50 threads in search of miracle equipment to give you more pop on the serve, instead of practicing and coaching.

[uncooling]

Originally Posted by Say Chi Sin Lo

Technique.

Just trying to save you the trouble of making 50 threads in search of miracle equipment to give you more pop on the serve, instead of practicing and coaching.

As I mentioned in other thread, I can easily serve at 110mph so I don't have any problem with my technique. But I think those factors matter a lot to advanced players especially, so I'm seeking some advice here. I'm not trying to change my whole serve or improve a lot by changing my equipment, but I know for sure there are some strings/racquet that are more friendly for hard servers and putting more pops on my serve.

In the end, this is what this forum is for, isn't it?

So any more advice is appreciated!!

thanks,

[anubis]

textured polyester strings give you the most spin.

natural gut gives you the most power.

Combine the two for godmode (joke). Perhaps try both by themselves and then in a hybrid form.

For more cost effective string jobs, you can substitute a very soft multifilament string for natural gut. multis are typically more powerful than poly and nylon, and the softer the string is generally more powerful than the stiffer ones.

[PrimeChoice]

What's a good textured poly anubis?

[TimothyO]

Originally Posted by Say Chi Sin Lo

Technique.

Just trying to save you the trouble of making 50 threads in search of miracle equipment to give you more pop on the serve, instead of practicing and coaching.

I just love this sort of reply.

The doofus is posting in a forum dedicated to the discussion of strings by saying "don't discuss strings".

I wonder if he also frequents political forums saying, "don't discuss politics, be a politician" or car forums saying, "don't discuss cars, just drive your car".

What sort of person frequents forums simply to say, "don't discuss this topic"? He must have loads of time on his hands given the number of forums available to protest against.

[Say Chi Sin Lo]

Originally Posted by TimothyO

I just love this sort of reply.

The doofus is posting in a forum dedicated to the discussion of strings by saying "don't discuss strings".

I wonder if he also frequents political forums saying, "don't discuss politics, be a politician" or car forums saying, "don't discuss cars, just drive your car".

What sort of person frequents forums simply to say, "don't discuss this topic"? He must have loads of time on his hands given the number of forums available to protest against.

Truth hurts, doesn't it? I'm not saying to not discuss strings dumb*****, I'm saying that problem may lie largely with technique and such. OP wants more power, fine, the answer isn't with poly, but with gut.

"Don't talk about strings?" Surely you haven't read my reviews on several strings here. Or you find maybe my personal belief that equipment play a miniscule role in the outcome of the shot to be ridiculous? In that case, keep playing into the hands of marketers because there are tons of "quick fixes" out there for you to purchase.

Now, do you want me to explain to you the science of gut and why it provides more power? I'm sure you do, since you have so much faith in equipment that they provide quick fixes. Or is that too much for you to understand considering your inability to comprehend my simple posts and the blatant attempt at mis-quoting me.

OP, if you really serve 110mph consistently, I honestly don't think switching strings will have that much effect.

[3fees]

There hard and soft poly,round and round textured, A String that will add spin to a spin stroke--there are many,,msv focus hex,genesis hexonic,Lux alu power spin,ect.

[lawrencejin]

Originally Posted by Say Chi Sin Lo

Technique.

Just trying to save you the trouble of making 50 threads in search of miracle equipment to give you more pop on the serve, instead of practicing and coaching.

I understand where you're coming from, but the thing is, many people already understand that technique is the most important factor in tennis performance. It's actually rather presumptuous of you to assume that the OP isn't aware of that, and to reply to his questions like this. By doing so, you're neither helping the OP nor making any useful contribution to the thread.

I am also quite equipment-insensitive, so I agree with you that technique is most important. For the sake of argument let's say it's 80% technique, 10% racket, and 10% strings. But that 10% is still enough to validate OP's question. Give me a racket with a horrendous string set-up -- e.g. loose synthetics or dead poly. I can still play 90% of my game, but that lack of 10% is frustrating enough for me to validly search for a better alternative. After all, we're here to optimize our tennis performance, and this forum allows us to discuss string options. Why forego knowledge that could help our game, irregardless of whether it's a major determinant of our overall game performance or not?

What I'm saying is, if it's obvious that the OP is having ridiculous expectations on strings to boost his/her game, then your 'Technique' response might be relevant. Here, it's not the case.

[fortun8son]

Well, the misconception on terms needed to be addressed first.
It's hard to give advice when you don't understand the question.

[Say Chi Sin Lo]

Originally Posted by lawrencejin

I understand where you're coming from, but the thing is, many people already understand that technique is the most important factor in tennis performance. It's actually rather presumptuous of you to assume that the OP isn't aware of that, and to reply to his questions like this. By doing so, you're neither helping the OP nor making any useful contribution to the thread.

I am also quite equipment-insensitive, so I agree with you that technique is most important. For the sake of argument let's say it's 80% technique, 10% racket, and 10% strings. But that 10% is still enough to validate OP's question. Give me a racket with a horrendous string set-up -- e.g. loose synthetics or dead poly. I can still play 90% of my game, but that lack of 10% is frustrating enough for me to validly search for a better alternative. After all, we're here to optimize our tennis performance, and this forum allows us to discuss string options. Why forego knowledge that could help our game, irregardless of whether it's a major determinant of our overall game performance or not?

What I'm saying is, if it's obvious that the OP is having ridiculous expectations on strings to boost his/her game, then your 'Technique' response might be relevant. Here, it's not the case.

You're being generous with your attributes to overall performance. For me, it's 90% me, 7% grip (size/shape/texture), 2% frame, 1% string.

Though I agree that we want to maximize our performances anyway that we can, but I'm not out to kid myself. If I miss a shot, or the resulting shot isn't as I had imagined for better or worse, it's all me.

I was kidding in another thread, that I missed all of my drop shot attempts and I was going to string my frames at 80lbs.

[lawrencejin]

Originally Posted by Say Chi Sin Lo

You're being generous with your attributes to overall performance. For me, it's 90% me, 7% grip (size/shape/texture), 2% frame, 1% string.

Though I agree that we want to maximize our performances anyway that we can, but I'm not out to kid myself. If I miss a shot, or the resulting shot isn't as I had imagined for better or worse, it's all me.

I was kidding in another thread, that I missed all of my drop shot attempts and I was going to string my frames at 80lbs.

This is slightly off topic (my apologies to OP), but if those percentages are true, I envy you.. and I'm not being sarcastic here. A few weeks ago, for fun I swapped rackets with my friend who was using a beginner's oversize racket. I played nowhere near 98% of my best game. I could still play decently enough, but I wouldn't have been successful if I played more competitively with folks similar to my skill level. Similarly, I cannot play 99% of my best game with e.g. rocket launcher strings.

[fortun8son]

I'm a musician and I was just in a recording session where I needed new strings on my acoustic guitars that I felt comfortable with and refused to let the salesman upsell me.
I also realized that I needed one guitar for one song , and another for the other.
This may be esoteric, but I believe that it relates to racquets and strings.
It's what you are comfortable with and, yes, there is a placebo effect.

[Rabbit]

to the OP -

Poly = material

Mono = construction

There are numerous materials used in strings, nylon, natural gut, polyester, kevlar, etc.

The way the material is used, monofilament, multifilament, shaped monofilament, etc speak to how the material is "put together".

[corbind]

Originally Posted by lawrencejin

I understand where you're coming from, but the thing is, many people already understand that technique is the most important factor in tennis performance. It's actually rather presumptuous of you to assume that the OP isn't aware of that, and to reply to his questions like this. By doing so, you're neither helping the OP nor making any useful contribution to the thread.

I am also quite equipment-insensitive, so I agree with you that technique is most important. For the sake of argument let's say it's 80% technique, 10% racket, and 10% strings. But that 10% is still enough to validate OP's question. Give me a racket with a horrendous string set-up -- e.g. loose synthetics or dead poly. I can still play 90% of my game, but that lack of 10% is frustrating enough for me to validly search for a better alternative. After all, we're here to optimize our tennis performance, and this forum allows us to discuss string options. Why forego knowledge that could help our game, irregardless of whether it's a major determinant of our overall game performance or not?

What I'm saying is, if it's obvious that the OP is having ridiculous expectations on strings to boost his/her game, then your 'Technique' response might be relevant. Here, it's not the case.

We need more lawrencejin types in the forms as this is the kind of care that makes for a better discussions/help.

[lawrencejin]

Originally Posted by corbind

We need more lawrencejin types in the forms as this is the kind of care that makes for a better discussions/help.

Haha that's very nice of you. I do my best to be nice and respectful on these forums (as long as I'm sober)