More dense string patterns give more spin

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by Ducker

They would argue that, and they are completely correct ie there is more surface area of strings in contact with the ball (however small it might be). However, Its not that (surface area) that imparts the most spin production. It is the more space between strings that allows the ball to sink or become sunken deeper into the bed. That is why the open pattern provides a small bit more spin.

I believe also you will gain higher launch angle (all things being equal), and more power with a open pattern.

That's not right! There was a thread about a year ago with a link to a Japanese study conducted with high speed recording that established that it's the additional movement and snap back of the strings in a more open pattern that produces more spin. Have you ever heard of spaghetti strings? Poly is very hard and slippery. So, it can move back and forth very readily upon contact with a ball. In an open pattern, it can move further on contact and, therefore, produce a bigger snap back, similar to the effect of spaghetti strings.

[LeeD]

Gotta use more flexibility in your thought.
Sure, obvious is less strings, more trampoline.
But there's the less obvious.
More strings, more control and less power, right? Meaning, now you can go out and swing the snot out of your racket, and the ball goes IN, so you hit with more spin, more power, and feel comfortable going for it.

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by LeeD

Gotta use more flexibility in your thought.
Sure, obvious is less strings, more trampoline.
But there's the less obvious.
More strings, more control and less power, right? Meaning, now you can go out and swing the snot out of your racket, and the ball goes IN, so you hit with more spin, more power, and feel comfortable going for it.

I'm not sure what you mean by "trampoline." But, I'm talking about the interwoven main strings moving back and forth almost like spaghetti strings. The more open the pattern, the more poly string can move and snap back. That's why poly produces more spin than gut. Gut moves but doesn't snap backi. And that is also why open patterns produce more spin than dense patterns.

[LeeD]

Just too much limiting in your thought process.
You see a C as a lefty U.
But it can be an upside down D without the post, right?
I swing really fast, getting slower with age. Playing against a strong hitter, a dense string pattern gives me more control, so I can hit back harder.
Against the same hard hitter, my 16x18 tends to spray the ball more, mishits less forgiving, and I tend to guide the ball, instead of hitting it.
Confidence allows a player to hit harder, so it's not all about open or closed patterns.

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by LeeD

Just too much limiting in your thought process.
You see a C as a lefty U.
But it can be an upside down D without the post, right?
I swing really fast, getting slower with age. Playing against a strong hitter, a dense string pattern gives me more control, so I can hit back harder.
Against the same hard hitter, my 16x18 tends to spray the ball more, mishits less forgiving, and I tend to guide the ball, instead of hitting it.
Confidence allows a player to hit harder, so it's not all about open or closed patterns.

My thought process is fine. You just changed the subject.

[Timbo's hopeless slice]

Well, I have just switched from 18 X 20 to 16 x 20 and I think I am generating more spin, particularly on serve and FH.

Racquet specs are otherwise almost identical, the new one has a slightly wider beam and is a bit stiffer, but that's it.

Identical strings and tension (Head sonic pro 17 @ 55)

A sample of one isn't data, of course, but still...

[LeeD]

"more dense string patters give more spin".. ??????
That's the title.
Your though process is inflexible, you approach it from ONE direction.

[LeeD]

I"m in your boat, as you know.
Switching from more to less strings, but also to a lighter racket, I can hit more spin IF the incoming ball is not coming too fast.
IF the incoming ball IS coming too fast for me to handle comfortably, I can hit it back with more pace and more spin with the heavier stic
vs. better players, heavier stick, around 12 oz.
vs weak hitting softballers, lighter stick around 10 oz so I can hit it hard.

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by Timbo's hopeless slice

Well, I have just switched from 18 X 20 to 16 x 20 and I think I am generating more spin, particularly on serve and FH.

Racquet specs are otherwise almost identical, the new one has a slightly wider beam and is a bit stiffer, but that's it.

Identical strings and tension (Head sonic pro 17 @ 55)

A sample of one isn't data, of course, but still...

Here's the article I referenced above. Be sure to watch the video. It's a definitive explanation: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...f-tennis/8339/

[LeeD]

There is the theory of tennis....what should work according to logic, and there is the PRACTICE of tennis.....what really works on the court using human beings, in all their flaws.............

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by LeeD

"more dense string patters give more spin".. ??????
That's the title.
Your though process is inflexible, you approach it from ONE direction.

Your thought process prevents you from staying on point. The trampoline effect you interjected into the conversation is inapposite to the discussion. Now, please sit down and shut up.

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by LeeD

There is the theory of tennis....what should work according to logic, and there is the PRACTICE of tennis.....what really works on the court using human beings, in all their flaws.............

And you are the most human being of them all, Lee.

[LeeD]

Of course I am. I often post about my frailties and failures in tennis.
Most posters only mention their successes.
See, there's TWO sides to every story. Even though I don't acknowledge your side of the story, it doesn't mean I don't recognize it and agree with it...in theory.
Open up. You're too closed minded. When someone asks you... say...."when did the spanish war happen, you might answer .... the exact date ...OR, you might mention the circumstances that LED to the war....
That's two answers, both correct. You keep mentioning the date. I refer to the circumstances.

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by LeeD

Of course I am. I often post about my frailties and failures in tennis.
Most posters only mention their successes.
See, there's TWO sides to every story. Even though I don't acknowledge your side of the story, it doesn't mean I don't recognize it and agree with it...in theory.
Open up. You're too closed minded. When someone asks you... say...."when did the spanish war happen, you might answer .... the exact date ...OR, you might mention the circumstances that LED to the war....
That's two answers, both correct. You keep mentioning the date. I refer to the circumstances.

Thank you, Sensei!

[rufusbgood]

Somebody recently put a Snauwaert Hi Ten 30 (12M x 13X) up for sale on the big auction site and it fetched $400. In it's day, keeping the thing strung was a real problem but with today's strings who knows what it's capable of.

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by rufusbgood

Somebody recently put a Snauwaert Hi Ten 30 (12M x 13X) up for sale on the big auction site and it fetched $400. In it's day, keeping the thing strung was a real problem but with today's strings who knows what it's capable of.

Looks a bit like a modern Yonex. It also looks like an 85si head size which would tend to counter the open string pattern a bit.

Conversely, imagine playing with the old wood Dunlop Fort or Wilson Kramer, both 65si heads with 18x20 string patterns.

[Kevo]

Originally Posted by Limpinhitter

Here's the article I referenced above. Be sure to watch the video. It's a definitive explanation: http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...f-tennis/8339/

What's it definitive of in your opinion? That strings with less friction produce more spin, or less strings produce more spin?

Even knowing that string snap back can contribute to spin, it's not clear to me that it's a simple calculation that determines whether 16x18 or 18x20 is better for a particular individual.

[Limpinhitter]

Originally Posted by Kevo

What's it definitive of in your opinion? That strings with less friction produce more spin, or less strings produce more spin?

Even knowing that string snap back can contribute to spin, it's not clear to me that it's a simple calculation that determines whether 16x18 or 18x20 is better for a particular individual.

From the article and video demonstration, I would conclude that if all other things are equal, a denser string pattern of interwoven strings will inhibit string movement - and subsiquent snapback - compared to a more open pattern.

[LeeD]

Denser string pattern rackets tend to get strung with softer tension, refuting some of that argument.
I regularly use 5 lbs less tension in 18x20 than I do with 16.19 frames

[corners]

Originally Posted by Klatu Verata Necktie

We should refer this matter to the Mythbusters. Adam, Jamie, Grant, Tory, and Carrie can build a racquet swinging robot that could test whether or not an open pattern really does impart more spin than a dense pattern.

A robot isn't necessary. All you have to do is fire balls at a stationary racquet with an impact angle commensurate with what happens in a real topspin shot. This was done last year by Tennis Warehouse's own "Professor" (aka Crawford Lindsey, coauthor of "Physics and Technology of Tennis" and "Technical Tennis") in his paper "Spin and String Pattern."

As long as the main strings are relatively free to slide sideways and snap back (in other words, they are not locked in place), Lindsey's experiments show that a more open pattern will generate more spin than a closed pattern. Fewer cross strings means less total friction between those strings on the mains, allowing the mains to slide and stretch sideways and then snap back more freely and with more energy. Additional spin is provided by the mains during the second half of the impact, when they snap back into position and exert a spin-inducing torque on the ball.

Note that in these experiments conventional string patterns were compared with extremely open patterns where half the cross strings were skipped (somewhat similar to the old Hi-Ten racquet or Vortex Extreme Spin frames). The extremely open patterns generated much more spin, but the difference between 16x19 and 18x20 in the same headsize is probably much smaller. But on today's market we have 90 inch heads with 18x20 patterns and 110 inch heads with 16x18 patterns. Here we would expect to see significantly more spin with the very open pattern in a big head.

This snapback effect is also improved by using strings with low string-on-string friction coefficients, such as copoly strings. Conversely, it may not function much at all with sticky strings such as notched syngut or polyurethane-based multis (Technifibre Biphase, et al.). With the latter types of strings a player might not see much difference between open and closed patterns because the strings are pretty much locked in place, regardless of the string pattern.

The Professor has also built a database of string on string friction coefficients: sliding and static COFs. Just because a particular string slides with little friction on another doesn't necessarily mean that it generates more spin, but slippery copoly strings have been shown in other experiments to generate 20-30% more spin than sticky synguts or multis, so these lists do give a decent indication of which strings will give a spin boost through main string snapback.