For those who say polys don't harm pros

[gameboy]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

And BILLIONS of people smoked over the last millennium. Does that mean that smoking can't possibly cause health problems?

Do we really need a study to confirm something that's so obvious?

The fact that smoking causes cancer was proven by scientific studies. Until then, it was commonly accepted by many that smoking was good for you.

Just like smoking causes cancer, if the effect is real, you should be able to measure it. If it is so obvious, it should not take much effort to prove it, not just sprout some nonsensical anecdotes.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by gameboy

The fact that smoking causes cancer was proven by scientific studies. Until then, it was commonly accepted by many that smoking was good for you.

Just like smoking causes cancer, if the effect is real, you should be able to measure it. If it is so obvious, it should not take much effort to prove it, not just sprout some nonsensical anecdotes.

Really? People die from smoke inhalation yet some people thought that inhaling cigarette smoke was good for you? I guess there are always going to be dumb people in the world who actually think inhaling smoke is good for you or that using stiff poly strings is not bad for you.

BTW, billions of people smoked. Not nearly enough people use poly strings to play tennis to warrant or pay for a scientific study. Just like it's not necessary to conduct a scientific study to prove that cutting off a person's arm will cause them to bleed.

[Venetian]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

Really? People die from smoke inhalation yet some people thought that inhaling cigarette smoke was good for you? I guess there are always going to be dumb people in the world who actually think inhaling smoke is good for you or that using stiff poly strings is not bad for you.

BTW, billions of people smoked. Not nearly enough people use poly strings to play tennis to warrant or pay for a scientific study. Just like it's not necessary to conduct a scientific study to prove that cutting off a person's arm will cause them to bleed.

I love your logic. There can't possibly be a study on this, therefore, my opinion is correct.

And your arm cutting-off example is completely different (obviously). You can see someone get cut and then watch the blood come out immediately after, clearly pointing to the blood being a result of the cut. Tendon injuries come about gradually (unless they're acute from sudden trauma) and cannot be seen. They are different for everyone, take varying amounts of time to manifest themselves, and everyone who gets them is doing many other things during that time. It's something that has to be studied to determine the real root cause. Since it hasn't been studied, you can't just claim your opinion as fact, and then cite the same anecdotal evidence over and over again.

[Venetian]

............................

[Hi I'm Ray]

Whether or not it really is going to cause long term harm, idk. I do know that today's rackets and poly is much harder feeling on the arm than the gear I used 10+ years ago. I use stiff rackets and poly now because I like they way they play, but I'm taking precautions by using a softer syn cross and might be going with even softer multi crosses.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Venetian

I love your logic. There can't possibly be a study on this, therefore, my opinion is correct.

And your arm cutting-off example is completely different (obviously). You can see someone get cut and then watch the blood come out immediately after, clearly pointing to the blood being a result of the cut. Tendon injuries come about gradually (unless they're acute from sudden trauma) and cannot be seen. They are different for everyone, take varying amounts of time to manifest themselves, and everyone who gets them is doing many other things during that time. It's something that has to be studied to determine the real root cause. Since it hasn't been studied, you can't just claim your opinion as fact, and then cite the same anecdotal evidence over and over again.

Things that are so obvious don't require studies. Why would string manufacturers market soft strings as being arm friendly if the converse wasn't also true? I mean if stiff strings were also arm friendly, why would they need to promote soft strings as the ones that are arm friendly?

Oh, and we also don't need a study to inform us that driving and texting is dangerous because it's OBVIOUS!

[Venetian]

Why do companies make "softer" poly strings? I'll give you three reasons.

1. Because some people like a softer feeling string. Not having anything to do with injury prevention.

2. They market them to people who already have arm issues and still want to play with poly.

3. Because people believe without sufficient evidence that poly is harmful, and their marketing department has found a way to sell them a product.

[Venetian]

Again, you keep saying this is obvious, when to me and many others it is not. I know plenty of people that have played for years with poly and have no arm issues. I also know numerous people who use synthetic gut in flexible heavy frames and wear arm braces. If poly is so harmful, why do so many people use it with no ill effects? And why do so many people not use it and still suffer from arm injuries? Could it be because there are other underlying issues? Examples include: stiff racquets, light racquets, muscle imbalances, improper technique, etc...

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Venetian

Again, you keep saying this is obvious, when to me and many others it is not. I know plenty of people that have played for years with poly and have no arm issues. I also know numerous people who use synthetic gut in flexible heavy frames and wear arm braces. If poly is so harmful, why do so many people use it with no ill effects? And why do so many people not use it and still suffer from arm injuries? Could it be because there are other underlying issues? Examples include: stiff racquets, light racquets, muscle imbalances, improper technique, etc...

Yeah, and I know plenty of people who have smoked for years and have no health issues. I guess that must mean that smoking is completely safe?

Sure, other things may cause arm problems. But all else being equal, using a stiff string like poly will be worse for your arm than a soft string will. Just like being hit in the arm with something stiff is going to hurt you more than being hit with something soft.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by Venetian

Why do companies make "softer" poly strings? I'll give you three reasons.

1. Because some people like a softer feeling string. Not having anything to do with injury prevention.

2. They market them to people who already have arm issues and still want to play with poly.

3. Because people believe without sufficient evidence that poly is harmful, and their marketing department has found a way to sell them a product.

"soft poly string" is an oxymoron. No matter how "soft" they market a poly string, it is still much stiffer than a soft multi or natural gut.

It does have to do with injury prevention. I'm not talking about soft poly strings. I'm talking about soft multi strings which manufacturers market as being "arm friendly". Have you ever heard of any string companies promoting people to switch from a soft multi string to a poly string because the poly is more arm friendly? No, the opposite is what they do.

[gameboy]

Sigh...

It is impossible to have a reasonable discussion with someone who eschews reason.

I guess it just comes down to this.

If you are the type who believe whatever a some random guy says without any evidence, then you should avoid using poly strings. Because the random internet guy says they cause injuries.

If you are the type who need actual evidence to believe something, there is no scientific evidence that says poly strings cause more injuries.

What you believe is up to you.

[JT_2eighty]

Another side of the debate that hasn't been looked at here, is this:

Poly strings compliment a *High Spin* playstyle, more than anything. Players using extreme grips and hitting with big topspin are *brushing* over the ball, rather than the classic playstyle that worked better with Gut and dense patterns; i.e. hitting flat and *through* the ball.

One stroke is going to transmit much more shock back to your arm than the other (the flat stroke that pummels the ball head-on). Players with a playstyle of the Borg/McEnroe era and even Agassi/Sampras era are *typically* going to be seen using Gut, gut hybrids, syn gut, or multis. They are typically going to be using heavier sticks and smaller headsizes, hitting the ball flat, or with "standard" spin with a continental or eastern grip and finishing points at the net when they can, generally speaking.

Players of the modern playstyle, looking to maximize spin with their western or extreme western grips and grind out the baseline, are going to gravitate toward the lighter, stiffer frames, with poly or poly hybrids. This is just a matter of preference as certain equipment caters to certain type of play and mechanics. The extreme topspin stoke, the reverse forehand, etc; employ more of a 'brush up' on the ball, rather than a flat, follow-through into the ball. The brushing up onto the ball is naturally transmitting less shock into the racquet and down to the arm.

The latest pro string logs show that even the pros are stringing their poly in the 50s (in most cases), or below. The ones still stringing over 60 are few and far between. There are some clay court specialists stringing below 40lbs. It is also known that gut at 60+ tension still retains a high level or elasticity and resiliency, while co-poly strings reach their maximum stretch point much earlier on and do not absorb shock as well as gut.

So again back to my point, is that poly is going to be more detrimental to one's joints/tendons/etc if you are not brushing up on the ball, as the classic continental or eastern grip type of stroke will naturally transmit more shock at impact than a high-spin stroke which transmits less shock down through the frame into your arm.

While I do agree on the one hand that one's racquet or string can impact the arm health of the player, we cannot completely point to ONE THING ONLY, i.e. 'the string killed your arm', or 'that racquet is arm friendly', etc etc.

Form, mechanics, equipment... all these things are but pieces of the entire puzzle and each one plays its role. Certain playstyles will benefit from certain choices of equipment. Other playstyles have no business using certain equipment. Stringing up co-poly at 70 pounds or for someone 'looking for a durable string' are just BAD IDEAS. Stringing up full gut for a baseline grinder who hits full spin on both wings using a Wilson Steam 16x15 is probably also a recipe for a different kind of disaster.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by gameboy

Sigh...

It is impossible to have a reasonable discussion with someone who eschews reason.

I guess it just comes down to this.

If you are the type who believe whatever a some random guy says without any evidence, then you should avoid using poly strings. Because the random internet guy says they cause injuries.

If you are the type who need actual evidence to believe something, there is no scientific evidence that says poly strings cause more injuries.

What you believe is up to you.

Do we really need a scientific study to tell us that getting hit in the head with a baseball bat is going to hurt more than getting hit with a pillow?

BTW:

http://www.tennisconsult.com/tennis-...ennis-players/

[Rabbit]

Originally Posted by Venetian

Why do companies make "softer" poly strings? I'll give you three reasons.

1. Because some people like a softer feeling string. Not having anything to do with injury prevention.

2. They market them to people who already have arm issues and still want to play with poly.

3. Because people believe without sufficient evidence that poly is harmful, and their marketing department has found a way to sell them a product.

I have a little different take on it. When I played with Timo, I hated the feel, but loved the results. It let me put the ball on a dime. But there was a trade off, my arm was just plain dead after about a year. So, for me, the newer, softer polys are more of a choice for me because I don't want arm issues.

The way I look at it, the new generation of polys, the very one Lux is trying to catch up to, give you the feel of a synthetic along with the performance of a poly. They don't quite match up performance-wise, but the newer polys like Spin Cycle, TB, and a plethora of others tend to give you the best of both worlds. The new polys have plenty of pop, control, and spin; almost as much pop as a syngut. They lack a little on durability, but hey....I'll take that.

[gameboy]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

Do we really need a scientific study to tell us that getting hit in the head with a baseball bat is going to hurt more than getting hit with a pillow?

BTW:

http://www.tennisconsult.com/tennis-...ennis-players/

The link is just another anecdote. And you can easily do a scientific study on impact injuries caused by a hammer versus feather.

The study is required because for many millenia, it was assumed that a heavier object falls faster and everybody just accepted it as a fact. It wasn't until someone did a scientific test that that was found not to be the case.

What is "obvious" to you is not obvious at all.

You can reply a thousand times over. It still does not change the fact that there is absolutely no scientific basis that supports poly cause more injuries.

[BreakPoint]

Originally Posted by gameboy

The link is just another anecdote. And you can easily do a scientific study on impact injuries caused by a hammer versus feather.

The study is required because for many millenia, it was assumed that a heavier object falls faster and everybody just accepted it as a fact. It wasn't until someone did a scientific test that that was found not to be the case.

What is "obvious" to you is not obvious at all.

You can reply a thousand times over. It still does not change the fact that there is absolutely no scientific basis that supports poly cause more injuries.

But why would anyone need one? If you don't think that getting hit in the face with a hammer is any different than getting hit in the face with a feather, then there really isn't that much else to say.

So I guess getting kicked in the balls doesn't really hurt either? Because I've never seen a scientific study that tells me it's supposed to hurt? And as you know, without scientific studies, we don't know right from wrong, up from down, nor left from right.

BTW: http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/lc/s...reference.html

[zapvor]

Originally Posted by THESEXPISTOL

You won't hear it from anyone else. They're just being paid a sh*tload of dollars to keep their mouth shut!

i dont think its so much the money but they feel if everyone is using it they need the advantage too so they dont lose out

[fullpolyserve&volley]

Originally Posted by sundaypunch

Poly at 75 lbs? What could go wrong?

Poly at 75 lbs is for whimps. Real men do full kevlar at 75

[pennc94]

Originally Posted by BreakPoint

But why would anyone need one? If you don't think that getting hit in the face with a hammer is any different than getting hit in the face with a feather, then there really isn't that much else to say.

So I guess getting kicked in the balls doesn't really hurt either? Because I've never seen a scientific study that tells me it's supposed to hurt? And as you know, without scientific studies, we don't know right from wrong, up from down, nor left from right.

BTW: http://www.tennis-warehouse.com/lc/s...reference.html

A hammer in the face or a kick to the groin have no confounding factors. The confounding factors in a tennis stroke include technique, biomechanics, the racquet itself, the individual's arm, overuse, etc. Your examples are too simplistic. Your examples fail if you add confounding factors. A kick to the groin of an individual wearing a steel cup may not injure that individual.

Nobody is trying to convince you about poly safety. All that is being said is that you have no objective evidence to prove that polyester strings cause injury. Your anecdotal stories or links to web logs are insufficient.

[Fintft]

Originally Posted by pennc94

A hammer in the face or a kick to the groin have no confounding factors. The confounding factors in a tennis stroke include technique, biomechanics, the racquet itself, the individual's arm, overuse, etc. Your examples are too simplistic. Your examples fail if you add confounding factors. A kick to the groin of an individual wearing a steel cup may not injure that individual.

Nobody is trying to convince you about poly safety. All that is being said is that you have no objective evidence to prove that polyester strings cause injury. Your anecdotal stories or links to web logs are insufficient.

Very few people, if any, get tennis elbow from natural gut, but rather from using poly. And once you got it, I could only play with gut strung at lower tensions 52/50 LBS for a while...A couple of months with poly (Pro Hurricane tour, high 40s) and I tend to feel pain in my arm/elbow again. Back to gut at 57/55 LBs for years and no problem whatsoever.