Low, low tensions. 30lbs feels great. 20lbs pretty good, too

[SplitStepper]

Originally Posted by TW Staff

I put a really good hit on the C10 Pro today with Kirschbaum Long Life Spiky 1.38mm @ 35lbs. The C10 Pro was a racquet I almost switched to and have gone back and hit often as I've always enjoyed the feel. I always had an issue with shots flying on me with the C10 Pro and that was what ultimately kept me away from it. That has completely gone with this set up and I've really been enjoying it the last two times I've hit with it.

I'm not tempted to move away from my PB10 Mids at all, but this is the best performance I've ever found with the C10 Pro.

Have been talking to the TW Prof and he wants me to try gut in the low 30s, so I'll be giving that a go this week. A little worried about power and string movement going in, but we will see how it goes. The lowest I've hit gut is 45lbs, and that's in my adidas Nastase Champion (woodie).

Cheers,
Chris.

Any competitive hitting with full gut at these tensions will be a real bummer. Strings will be everywhere as well as your shots. Great for feeding drills, but not compatible for competition or a good hit. Good luck though. Maybe your experience will be different than mine.

[JT_2eighty]

So I strung my PT with PH18 (not tour) at 28/26 lbs. Played a match that lasted 1:20. I need to try ~35lbs next time, but only to alleviate an odd resonance that normally isn't there.

Originally Posted by TearSNFX

I developed SEVERE carpel tunnel at 20 and 30.

Whole palm was tingling and it was difficult making a fist after 5 minutes of hitting. Obviously the vibration is doing something.

During warmup, I did feel this additional "buzz" that TW Chris also felt at 10lbs, but only during medium-paced warm-up shots, or flat block-shots. Initially I remarked to myself it felt like I had strung rubber bands in there, but non-trampoliney ones, oddly enough. With the PT, you can feel how these strings are flexing and grabbing the ball in the instant of ball contact.

Fast-paced shots and/or high-spin shots there was no buzz as the point with this setup seemed to be to maximize dwell time, which you don't get on flatter, blocked pushes and dinks, which seemed to have that extra buzz feedback and also sail long. High paced flat serves and a few successful inside-out flat forehands were actually no problem with this setup, and felt very non-polylike off the stringbed. Comfort was fine. Nice pocketing, rewarding faster swings with zero shock, and remarkable feel. Previously, I had swore off poly due to it lacking this feel. Spin reminiscent of gut/poly mid-high 40s. Net control surprisingly great. Still prefer kevlar/gut at net.

Originally Posted by Ross K

So would this low tension thing therefore work in a PT630?...

What strings would ppl advise for a low tension string-job too in the PT630?

And how low a tension?

Thanks,

R.

I wouldn't suggest the ph below 30, but wow, the potential for these low setups is unreal in the PT. Next stop, ~35 with a poly a tad stiffer than ph18

[nickarnold2000]

Originally Posted by drak

Here's what might be an ironic twist if this low tension Poly thing becomes a craze - the cheap old stiff Poly strings may very well work just as well or better than all the spendy new softer CoPoly's, wouldn't that be a hoot.

Drak

Yes, it would be a hoot because it means that I'll have some extra money to buy more premium beer!

[Fed Kennedy]

Gut in the 30s sounds crazy but after having tried alu and pro line 2 at 30 and loving it I am ready to let go of all preconceived notions.

What is the profs rationale? That the gut will revert to a lower power when strung so low?

By the way pro line 2 at 30 feels like gut!

[TearSNFX]

Originally Posted by schenkelini

That seems backwards. I would think that low tension would lead to less vibration not more.

There is AUDIBLE low frequency vibration. And the deep ping rings for a very long time. Tighter string = higher frequency and lower tension = lower frequency. It set off my carpel tunnel and tennis elbow in 5 minutes, while using the same exact racquet ( K90 ).

I usually string Poly at 56 and synthetic at 62 on cross and I don't get tennis elbow or carpel.

[corners]

Originally Posted by Fed Kennedy

Hey corners, what are some of those old school polys with good tension holding you are speaking of?

Take a look at the data from TW University's string tests:

http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/lear...ngselector.php

I think I was in error saying that the old school polys had some of the best tension maintenance. But it looks like some of the older-school copolys that are pretty cheap, like Wilson Enduro Pro, Cyberflash,, etc. hold tension as good or better than any, according to the testing.

That tool gives data for all strings at different tensions and swingspeeds. If you choose only poly strings and look at stiffness and tensions loss at low tension/high swingspeed you'll see that there is a fairly good correlation between high stiffness and low tension loss. The stiffer strings, like Enduro Pro, are also best for tension loss. So it might be possible to string low with these types of strings and still get a soft, arm-friendly response that's easy on the pocketbook.

Looking at the graph provided by the professor earlier in this thread it appears that a stiffer poly like Enduro would play similar to a soft string like Cyclone with about a 5 pound drop in tension.


Of course, there are some who dismiss these types of objective tests as useless, but I'm inclined to think that they are lacking in the capacity for abstract thought.

[corners]

Originally Posted by Fed Kennedy

Gut in the 30s sounds crazy but after having tried alu and pro line 2 at 30 and loving it I am ready to let go of all preconceived notions.

What is the profs rationale? That the gut will revert to a lower power when strung so low?

By the way pro line 2 at 30 feels like gut!

According to the graphs posted earlier in this thread gut at 30 would deflect only as much as poly at 15. Strangely, gut at 30 is only 20% less stiff than gut at 60 - hardly any difference at all. The results will be interesting. The tension/stiffness curve for gut is basically flat - very different than syngut or poly.

I'm planning to do gut/poly at 30-35 in a mid. Haven't had a chance to get to the stringer,but will post results when I have a chance. I think it will play just fine/great but I'm afraid the durability will be poor due to a lot of lateral deflection and sawing of the gut mains. Kevlar mains/poly crosses - the travlerajm rig - might be the ultimate super low tension setup.

[drak]

Originally Posted by nickarnold2000

Yes, it would be a hoot because it means that I'll have some extra money to buy more premium beer!

I like your attitude and will hoist a few for that!

Drak

[drak]

Yesterday I tried 33lbs (Cyberflash) on a 105 Vantage frame - did not like it as control was not good and I hit a lot of "flier's" long. Much different (worse IMO) than on my PB9 98 head size. I may up tension 5-7 lbs on the 105 and see if there is much difference. So I am wondering if this extreme low tension is best served on lower powered smaller head size frames? - other feedback here would be good.

Drak

[JT_2eighty]

Originally Posted by drak

Yesterday I tried 33lbs (Cyberflash) on a 105 Vantage frame - did not like it as control was not good and I hit a lot of "flier's" long. Much different (worse IMO) than on my PB9 98 head size. I may up tension 5-7 lbs on the 105 and see if there is much difference. So I am wondering if this extreme low tension is best served on lower powered smaller head size frames? - other feedback here would be good.

Drak

The same tension on a 98 versus a 105 will definitely feel more loose on the 105. I'm sure there's a formula to convert out there, but the longer the string, the more tension needed to reach the same feel (you'll have longer mains and/or crosses on the 105). I do know that it does feel good on a midplus frame, but also noticed flat shots are much harder to control, these uber-low setups require spin, almost beg for more spin. I think you're right on in trying it again 5-7# higher, but have no experience to back that up, I've only experience with 93-98" heads.

[TW Professor]

Originally Posted by UCSF2012

Perhaps, TW (TW prof) could measure the ball resiliancy with different string tensions, in search of the optimal tension. Granted, it'll be different for different strings, players, etc but it'd give us all a guideline.

Not exactly what you are looking for, but ...

As you can see on the energy return vs tension graph, poly has less energy return at all tensions compared to gut and nylon. What this means is a bit complicated. The question is this: does lower energy return from the strings mean less power (ball velocity)? The answer is that it may or may not. The efficiency of the strings is only part of the story. The other part involves string stiffness. The scenario looks like this:

Let's drop a ball on a secured racquet so that it will not move or bend on impact--only the strings and ball will interact (in a normal tennis hit, about two thirds of the energy goes into moving the racquet and about a third goes into the strings and ball deformations). Strings return energy that goes into them according to the graph (anywhere from about 73-97%). Let's say your string at your current tension returns 95% of the energy that goes into it. But how much energy goes into the strings? The strings and the ball divide up the available energy according to their relative stiffnesses. The softer of the two will get proportionately more of the energy of impact. So, if the stringbed and the ball are of equal stiffness, they will each take 50% of the energy. If the strings are half as stiff as the ball, then they will take in twice the energy (in other words the ball's share will be one third and the strings' share will be two thirds).

The ball returns about 55% of the energy that goes into it (depending some on the speed and angle of impact). The string we are looking returns 95%. What does this mean to our two cases above of a stiff setup and a soft setup?

If the the ball and strings are the same stiffness (which is a "close enough" assumption for conceptual purposes for most nylons strung in the 50-60lb range), then the ball will give back 55% of the energy, for a total of 27.5% return. The strings will give back 95% of 50% for a return of 47.5%. Added together we get a total return of 75% of the energy that went into the ball and strings. (FYI, the square root of energy return is power potential so here we have sqrt of .75 = .866 = power potential of 86.6%, which is so high because the racquet is clamped and does not lose energy in motion and bending)

If the strings are half as stiff as the ball, then we get 55% times 33% = 18.2% return from the ball and 95% times 66% = 62.7% return from the strings for a total return of 81%, which is 6% greater than if the string were twice as stiff (for power potential of 90%).

So lowering the stiffness of the strings compared to the ball lowers the amount of energy that goes into the inefficient ball and raises the amount that goes into the more efficient strings. But our graph shows that lowering the strings stiffness also lowers its energy efficiency. So it is somewhat of a trade-off. The stiffer setup has better string efficiency but has less energy to work with. The softer setup has lower string efficiency but more energy to work with.

Long story short, even if you don't know the relative stiffness of the ball and strings, you do know that no matter what, decreasing string stiffness by lowering tension or changing to a softer string increases the energy flow into the more efficient strings compared to the less efficient ball. But that doesn't necessarily mean more power. To end up with more power, enough extra energy has to be transferred to the strings to more than make up for any decline in string efficiency due to lower tension or due to a change to an inherently less efficient string or material.

What you can see from the graphs is that poly is virtually always stiffer than other materials except at very low tensions and it almost always has less energy return. The combination means that you may get more power going from one poly to a lower tension in the same (or you may not depending on the trade off), but except in extreme setups, you probably won't get more power than other materials that are at the same or even higher tensions. Note: the yellow area in the stiffness vs tension graph is where the 30lb poly is softer than all other higher tensioned strings and the light blue is where the 10lb poly is softer that all other higher tensioned strings.)

This analysis tends to confirm statements in this thread regarding power of poly setups at these lower tensions. Some say more, some say less, some say the same. But in most cases the reports are that "depth" has been greater, no matter the speed. The longer dwell times will allow the ball to stay on the racquet for a further distance of your stroke. Thus the launch will tend to be from a later position in the swing which will tend to launch in a higher trajectory, leading to more depth. (See the other graphs for dwell, deflection, and force on page 9 of this thread.) The longer dwell also helps explain the "spraying." Longer dwell time also exaggerates side to side errors.

[thebuffman]

Originally Posted by thebuffman

i went ahead and strung up my prestige pro with global gut @ 48# (main) and ALU BB @ 44# (cross). i plan to hit tomorrow and will let everyone know how it plays. my normal setup is 57# global gut full bed or global gut (or gaucho gut) & OG Micro Sheep cross.

yesterday i hit with the new setup on my prestige pro. hitting felt extremely soft. i did not feel any enhanced pocketing of ball. i was able to hit out and the ball stayed in play and as a matter of fact just about everything i hit stayed in play. every now and then a forehand would fly into the fence which is not typical for me. my balls hardly ever fly into the fence on my normal setups. serving was very strong and there was no loss of control.

overall it was a weird hitting session. the prestige pro is already a low powered racquet and is very head light. the low tensioned GG seemed to dull it down even more. hits were not crisp but felt very dull even though there was nice spin on the ball keeping it in play. net play was not crisp at all and lacked *pop*. a very dulled down experience.

eventually i slid my radical pro out of my bag strung with a new full bed of 17g gold gaucho gut @ 53/50#. it played very nice. volleys were crisp as well as ground strokes. the serve was just as potent but it bothered my golfers elbow issue which i've been nursing. it did take more effort to generate as much spin as the prestige pro setup when i hit out. eventually i got dialed in. i never went back to the prestige pro setup.

i will probably give the prestige pro gut/alu bb hybrid another shot, but i love a crisp feeling setup. it would probably have been best to put the gut/alu bb setup in my other radical for a better apples to apples comparison as the radical and prestige swing entirely different. the prestige keeps everything in play while the radical is a more potent stick.

[Xenakis]

Played with RIP Control at 30lbs today in my 95in 18x20 Vantage. Surprisingly, or not, it didn't feel that different to stringing it in the high 40s or low 50s.

It definitely pocketed the ball a bit more but not dramatically, it felt a little more comfortable than the higher tension but not significantly and I didn't notice any trampolining when hitting volleys and drop shots. Infact my drop shots were really 'on' today.

Definitely a stiffer feel than the Black Code and Advantage hybrid I was using before at 30lbs (that went off rather quickly unfortunately.)

Overally probably a bit better than the higher tension but there isn't much in it. Certainly isn't a mushy trampoline anyway (like you might expect from a multi, RIP Control isn't a normal multi though.)

The bonus compared to the poly (for me) is the longevity of the RIP Control, seems to play well for a lot longer than poly or other multis imo. Strings move a bit but that's not really much of a problem.

So it's a thumbs up from me for this string/setup, but not a wildly enthusiastic thumbs up. More of an affirmative wink of the eye and gentle nodding of the head.

[drak]

Originally Posted by Xenakis

Played with RIP Control at 30lbs today in my 95in 18x20 Vantage. Surprisingly, or not, it didn't feel that different to stringing it in the high 40s or low 50s.

It definitely pocketed the ball a bit more but not dramatically, it felt a little more comfortable than the higher tension but not significantly and I didn't notice any trampolining when hitting volleys and drop shots. Infact my drop shots were really 'on' today.

Definitely a stiffer feel than the Black Code and Advantage hybrid I was using before at 30lbs (that went off rather quickly unfortunately.)

Overally probably a bit better than the higher tension but there isn't much in it. Certainly isn't a mushy trampoline anyway (like you might expect from a multi, RIP Control isn't a normal multi though.)

The bonus compared to the poly (for me) is the longevity of the RIP Control, seems to play well for a lot longer than poly or other multis imo. Strings move a bit but that's not really much of a problem.

So it's a thumbs up from me for this string/setup, but not a wildly enthusiastic thumbs up. More of an affirmative wink of the eye and gentle nodding of the head.

I am starting to think the major benefit of low Poly or Rip type string stringing could be the comfort factor, as play results are similar for many at 30-35 lbs vs 55-60. As long as one hits with good spin, a low tension cheap Poly string may become popular for the folks with are/elbow issues, just a thought.

Drak

[Xenakis]

Originally Posted by drak

I am starting to think the major benefit of low Poly or Rip type string stringing could be the comfort factor, as play results are similar for many at 30-35 lbs vs 55-60. As long as one hits with good spin, a low tension cheap Poly string may become popular for the folks with are/elbow issues, just a thought.

Drak

I might try it at 20lbs next time. Although RIP control is a comfortable multifilament it isn't very stretchy. When I was tensioning with my dropweight it hardly needed anything from the ratchet, just one little pull-up with it and it was horizontal.

The mix is right for me, good mix of control/power, long lasting and comfortable.

However, just for the sake of it I would be interested to know what a stretchy multi like Wilson Sensation feels like at 30lbs.

[kalic]

Any reports after 10 or more hours of play ?
I plan to put Luxilon Ace in my PT630 @ around 40 lbs (btw, my regular tension is 50-55), but I don't have money to restring it after every training...

[W Cats]

If memory serves me right RIP Control is somewhat similar to Isospeed Professional an olefin ribbon type string and very different than your standard multi's. They are the next softest string next to natrual gut but have tension loss similar to almost a poly. I've hit with Isospeed Pro quite a bit and one of the things I liked about it was how it locked in the natural gut mains and itself when strung as a full job at regular tensions. At low tensions I would not be too surprised to see it move a bit and not move back as slippery poly would.

I'll be trying Topspin Cyber Twirl at 30lbs as soon as my string order comes in. I already have it on one of my 4D 200 16x19 at 52lbs. So it will be in interesting hit.

[Xenakis]

Originally Posted by W Cats

If memory serves me right RIP Control is somewhat similar to Isospeed Professional an olefin ribbon type string and very different than your standard multi's. They are the next softest string next to natrual gut but have tension loss similar to almost a poly. I've hit with Isospeed Pro quite a bit and one of the things I liked about it was how it locked in the natural gut mains and itself when strung as a full job at regular tensions. At low tensions I would not be too surprised to see it move a bit and not move back as slippery poly would.

I'll be trying Topspin Cyber Twirl at 30lbs as soon as my string order comes in. I already have it on one of my 4D 200 16x19 at 52lbs. So it will be in interesting hit.

RIP Control moves on me at higher tensions too, seems to be a feature. But it doesn't go brittle over time like other multis, I had a PT Head frame with some old RIP control in it (a year or two I would guess), it was frayed and had lost a lot of tension but still played pretty well (especially considering the person I got the frame from is a hard hitter/string breaker.. One reason I bought a reel of it.

[bad_call]

Originally Posted by TW Professor

Not exactly what you are looking for, but ...

As you can see on the energy return vs tension graph, poly has less energy return at all tensions compared to gut and nylon. What this means is a bit complicated. The question is this: does lower energy return from the strings mean less power (ball velocity)? The answer is that it may or may not. The efficiency of the strings is only part of the story. The other part involves string stiffness. The scenario looks like this:

Let's drop a ball on a secured racquet so that it will not move or bend on impact--only the strings and ball will interact (in a normal tennis hit, about two thirds of the energy goes into moving the racquet and about a third goes into the strings and ball deformations). Strings return energy that goes into them according to the graph (anywhere from about 73-97%). Let's say your string at your current tension returns 95% of the energy that goes into it. But how much energy goes into the strings? The strings and the ball divide up the available energy according to their relative stiffnesses. The softer of the two will get proportionately more of the energy of impact. So, if the stringbed and the ball are of equal stiffness, they will each take 50% of the energy. If the strings are half as stiff as the ball, then they will take in twice the energy (in other words the ball's share will be one third and the strings' share will be two thirds).

The ball returns about 55% of the energy that goes into it (depending some on the speed and angle of impact). The string we are looking returns 95%. What does this mean to our two cases above of a stiff setup and a soft setup?

If the the ball and strings are the same stiffness (which is a "close enough" assumption for conceptual purposes for most nylons strung in the 50-60lb range), then the ball will give back 55% of the energy, for a total of 27.5% return. The strings will give back 95% of 50% for a return of 47.5%. Added together we get a total return of 75% of the energy that went into the ball and strings. (FYI, the square root of energy return is power potential so here we have sqrt of .75 = .866 = power potential of 86.6%, which is so high because the racquet is clamped and does not lose energy in motion and bending)

If the strings are half as stiff as the ball, then we get 55% times 33% = 18.2% return from the ball and 95% times 66% = 62.7% return from the strings for a total return of 81%, which is 6% greater than if the string were twice as stiff (for power potential of 90%).

So lowering the stiffness of the strings compared to the ball lowers the amount of energy that goes into the inefficient ball and raises the amount that goes into the more efficient strings. But our graph shows that lowering the strings stiffness also lowers its energy efficiency. So it is somewhat of a trade-off. The stiffer setup has better string efficiency but has less energy to work with. The softer setup has lower string efficiency but more energy to work with.

Long story short, even if you don't know the relative stiffness of the ball and strings, you do know that no matter what, decreasing string stiffness by lowering tension or changing to a softer string increases the energy flow into the more efficient strings compared to the less efficient ball. But that doesn't necessarily mean more power. To end up with more power, enough extra energy has to be transferred to the strings to more than make up for any decline in string efficiency due to lower tension or due to a change to an inherently less efficient string or material.

What you can see from the graphs is that poly is virtually always stiffer than other materials except at very low tensions and it almost always has less energy return. The combination means that you may get more power going from one poly to a lower tension in the same (or you may not depending on the trade off), but except in extreme setups, you probably won't get more power than other materials that are at the same or even higher tensions. Note: the yellow area in the stiffness vs tension graph is where the 30lb poly is softer than all other higher tensioned strings and the light blue is where the 10lb poly is softer that all other higher tensioned strings.)

This analysis tends to confirm statements in this thread regarding power of poly setups at these lower tensions. Some say more, some say less, some say the same. But in most cases the reports are that "depth" has been greater, no matter the speed. The longer dwell times will allow the ball to stay on the racquet for a further distance of your stroke. Thus the launch will tend to be from a later position in the swing which will tend to launch in a higher trajectory, leading to more depth. (See the other graphs for dwell, deflection, and force on page 9 of this thread.) The longer dwell also helps explain the "spraying." Longer dwell time also exaggerates side to side errors.

thanks for posting. food for thought whilst reflecting on one's personal experience and hitting style.

[dman72]

I had my 3rd NXG strung up with gosen polyon ice (first generation super cheap poly) at 35 lbs..it felt REALLY lose..like I could easily push the strings in 1/4-1/2 inch. I could also tell that it will vibrate like mad, so I have an NXG silencer on it that covers about 6 main string.

I used it in my match last night..I know, never use new equipment/set up/stroke in a match for the first time.

Well, on groundstrokes it was great. Once you get over the complete lack of sound on impact, it is really cool. You could feel the dwell time, but I never felt like the ball was trampoling off the stringbed when I took a full swing. I hit some really nasty slices when I adjusted my stroke a bit. I had no real problem with serves, flat or spin...even volleys were okay.

The big drawback was defensive stabs and lobs. When I was out of position and reaching for the ball, not taking a full swing, a shot that normally I could float back into the court or block back seemed to be wildly uncontrollable...sailing wide, long, etc. I still felt good enough about it to keep playing with it and hopefully I can adjust my defensive shots.