Boris Becker (BB) London Club

JackB1

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
biciomac said:
sorry, 319gr unstrung... can you please weight your london? thanks
Click to expand...

That is a little heavy for sure. I weighed 3 of them and they all came in right around 325 strung, so yours will probably be around 329 strung, which is +4 grams over mine...not too bad. If it's used, you might want to check under the grip for leadtape or also inside the handle.
 
JackB1

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
TennisMaverick said:
At your level of play, switching to a leather grip probably won't even be noticeable.

The London is not as powerful as the APDC. You can't get as much power from a stick which has such a long dwell time as you can from a stick which is so quick to release the ball on-contact. These two sticks are also designed for two different types of players. Lastly, make sure that you reduce the cross string tension, 2-4 lbs from the mains when you restring.
Click to expand...

I don't see how dwell time or release time has any correlation with power?
You can lower tension to low 40's and have loads of cupping and dwell time, but the ball with rocket off the strings with tons of power. If you use TW's power map and compare the 2 racquets, they are actually almost identical in power.
http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/comparepower.cgi
 
S

skeeter

Professional
neverstopplaying said:
With more London experience, I would now say that the power is very controllable (I always hit with good TS), the hollow feeling went away with the leather grip, the timing issue is gone because my strokes on fast balls are more compact. I'm very happy with my serves with this racquet.
Click to expand...

If you don't mind, what string setup are you playing with on your London?
 
JackB1

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
skeeter said:
If you don't mind, what string setup are you playing with on your London?
Click to expand...

"To start out, I put 4 gms of lead at 5-7 on the London and strung it up with Genesis Typhoon mains (54) and Maxim Touch x's (56). Since I usually reduce my poly by 10%, this follows those that suggest lowering the x's in Volkls. I did not replace the grip with my usual leather."

Copied from his first post. Looks like poly
Mains is the way to go with the London. I was going to try a nat gut/poly hybrid, but I would probably need to string it at 60/55.
 
S

skeeter

Professional
Thanks, Jack. Thought he had posted that somewhere but couldn't find it. Seems like gut, particularly in the mains, would be a bit too powerful for the London unless you strung it pretty high.
 
TennisMaverick

TennisMaverick

Banned
JackB1 said:
I don't see how dwell time or release time has any correlation with power?
You can lower tension to low 40's and have loads of cupping and dwell time, but the ball with rocket off the strings with tons of power. If you use TW's power map and compare the 2 racquets, they are actually almost identical in power.
http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/comparepower.cgi
Click to expand...

Dude......this is like the fourth or fifth post....give it a rest before this thread also gets removed.
 
Last edited:
T

Torres

Banned
JackB1 said:
I don't see how dwell time or release time has any correlation with power?
You can lower tension to low 40's and have loads of cupping and dwell time, but the ball with rocket off the strings with tons of power. If you use TW's power map and compare the 2 racquets, they are actually almost identical in power.
http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/comparepower.cgi
Click to expand...

It has an effect on the speed of response of the ball off the stringbed, which could be the difference between you winning or losing the point, because it takes time off your opponent. A longer dwell time / shorter release time results in a more instant response off the stingbed. Useful when you're forcing the play, taking the ball early and/or trying to take time away from your opponent.
 
Last edited:
JackB1

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
Torres said:
It has an effect on the speed of response of the ball off the stringbed, which could be the difference between you winning or losing the point, because it takes time off your opponent. A longer dwell time / shorter release time results in a more instant response off the stingbed. Useful when you're forcing the play, taking the ball early and/or trying to take time away from your opponent.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. My point was dwell time doesn't have anything to do with power. There are racquets with lots of dwell time that are more control oriented racquets, like the Prestige or Rebel and their are racquets like the London that have good dwell time but are also high powered. In fact, most high dwell time racquets are flexible control frames, which makes the London unique.
 
JackB1

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
TennisMaverick said:
Dude......this is like the fourth or fifth post....give it a rest before this thread also gets removed.
Click to expand...

Please don't tell me what to do. I was challenging your comment. You can either respond and explain or not. There was nothing wrong with what I wrote.
Just stating something without anything to back it up is of little use to me.
 
TennisMaverick

TennisMaverick

Banned
JackB1 said:
Please don't tell me what to do. I was challenging your comment. You can either respond and explain or not. There was nothing wrong with what I wrote.
Just stating something without anything to back it up is of little use to me.
Click to expand...

There will be no responses forthcoming.
 
G

GOATmeal

New User
JackB1 said:
I don't see how dwell time or release time has any correlation with power?
You can lower tension to low 40's and have loads of cupping and dwell time, but the ball with rocket off the strings with tons of power. If you use TW's power map and compare the 2 racquets, they are actually almost identical in power.
http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/comparepower.cgi
Click to expand...

I don't know, Jack. I think dwell and release time would be directly related to racquet power, from a physics standpoint at least. There's an awful lot of variables to be accounted for: Power is equal to work over time, work is equal to force through a distance, and force is equal to mass times acceleration. So P = (m*a*d)/t. That tells me that dwell time, or lack of it would have an inverse relationship to power. And specifically, longer dwell times would equate to less power, and shorter dwell times would equate to greater power, all other variables remaining constant.

I never checked out that chart before, and I'm sure it's a useful tool, but when I demoed the London, I also demoed the ProKennex Ki15PSE, which in my experience was much, much more powerful than the London. Reading the chart makes it seem like it's fairly comparable - only a few zones on the racquet seem to be more than 2% pts. higher.

On another note, glad to hear that the Ignite Team seems to be working out well for you! It sounds like it's a good match for your style and game, and if you like the feel and response, I think you might have found a keeper. Will follow your other thread to see how it goes!
 
neverstopplaying

neverstopplaying

Professional
skeeter said:
If you don't mind, what string setup are you playing with on your London?
Click to expand...

I strung it up with Genesis Typhoon mains (54) and Maxim Touch x's (56). Since I usually reduce my poly by 10%, this follows those that suggest lowering the x's in Volkls.

I usually play with poly mains/multi x's at this tension or lower (51ms/53-56 x's). I may try a lower tension next time or even full soft co-poly - if comfort permits.
 
B

biciomac

New User
JackB1 said:
That is a little heavy for sure. I weighed 3 of them and they all came in right around 325 strung, so yours will probably be around 329 strung, which is +4 grams over mine...not too bad. If it's used, you might want to check under the grip for leadtape or also inside the handle.
Click to expand...

mine is a brand new London 344gr strung with dumpener and overgrip(tournagrip)
319gr+4gr dumpener+15gr string+6gr overgrip=344gr

mine is 15gr heavier than yours and this isn't normal...
 
JackB1

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
neverstopplaying said:
I strung it up with Genesis Typhoon mains (54) and Maxim Touch x's (56). Since I usually reduce my poly by 10%, this follows those that suggest lowering the x's in Volkls.

I usually play with poly mains/multi x's at this tension or lower (51ms/53-56 x's). I may try a lower tension next time or even full soft co-poly - if comfort permits.
Click to expand...

Did this combo give you more power or control?
 
Z

zumzool

Semi-Pro
I believe that dwell time relates to power as well. stiffer racquets generally release the ball faster while longer dwell times absorb some of the force of the ball before release.

A racquet that has a longer dwell time can still be more powerful than one without as long of a dwell time due to other factors that contribute to power such as the type of strings or weight.
 
P

Pneumated1

Hall of Fame
JackB1 said:
I don't see how dwell time or release time has any correlation with power?
You can lower tension to low 40's and have loads of cupping and dwell time, but the ball with rocket off the strings with tons of power. If you use TW's power map and compare the 2 racquets, they are actually almost identical in power.
http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/cgi-bin/comparepower.cgi
Click to expand...

1. Several posters in this thread and the other, zapped London thread advised that your first impressions with a stick are most important. You rejected this advice, and now, months later, have come full circle and confirmed that your first impressions with the London were in fact true.
2. Several posters have given recommendations for string set ups for the London, which you've flat refused. Your softer string should be in the crosses with this stick--at 2-4 lbs. less than your mains.
3. You have likely never experienced the characteristic dwell time of the London because you insist on putting your stiff poly in the crosses and your powerful multi in the mains. If you think about it, the multi in the mains is going to make for a quicker string bed, as well as the stiff crosses. You're not allowing the stick to perform according to its inherent design. And you can't just drop the tension in your poly crosses 2-4 lbs. because the poly is so much stiffer than the multi that you must first drop the tension the recommended percentage (5-10%) depending upon the string.
4. Because of 2 and 3 above, you're not experiencing the pocketing and dwell time that will lead to more control. But these are all things that you've been told many times in these two threads, so with all due respect, I'm forced to conclude that you refuse "to see" how all of this correlates. It really all makes perfect sense, otherwise.
5. I don't think I've seen another poster on these boards that refuses more advice than you--and you keep asking the same questions and trying to make the same uninformed points.
 
JackB1

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
zumzool said:
I believe that dwell time relates to power as well. stiffer racquets generally release the ball faster while longer dwell times absorb some of the force of the ball before release.

A racquet that has a longer dwell time can still be more powerful than one without as long of a dwell time due to other factors that contribute to power such as the type of strings or weight.
Click to expand...

Makes sense. The bottom line is that dwell time is not the only component of power. Typically, softer more flexible racquets have more dwell time and are usually less powerful. That's why I was saying the London is sort of unique in this respect.
 
S

skeeter

Professional
neverstopplaying said:
I strung it up with Genesis Typhoon mains (54) and Maxim Touch x's (56). Since I usually reduce my poly by 10%, this follows those that suggest lowering the x's in Volkls.

I usually play with poly mains/multi x's at this tension or lower (51ms/53-56 x's). I may try a lower tension next time or even full soft co-poly - if comfort permits.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Will try this out on upcoming stringing. Is this a relatively soft poly or stiff?
 
JackB1

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
Pneumated1 said:
1. Several posters in this thread and the other, zapped London thread advised that your first impressions with a stick are most important. You rejected this advice, and now, months later, have come full circle and confirmed that your first impressions with the London were in fact true.
2. Several posters have given recommendations for string set ups for the London, which you've flat refused. Your softer string should be in the crosses with this stick--at 2-4 lbs. less than your mains.
3. You have likely never experienced the characteristic dwell time of the London because you insist on putting your stiff poly in the crosses and your powerful multi in the mains. If you think about it, the multi in the mains is going to make for a quicker string bed, as well as the stiff crosses. You're not allowing the stick to perform according to its inherent design. And you can't just drop the tension in your poly crosses 2-4 lbs. because the poly is so much stiffer than the multi that you must first drop the tension the recommended percentage (5-10%) depending upon the string.
4. Because of 2 and 3 above, you're not experiencing the pocketing and dwell time that will lead to more control. But these are all things that you've been told many times in these two threads, so with all due respect, I'm forced to conclude that you refuse "to see" how all of this correlates. It really all makes perfect sense, otherwise.
5. I don't think I've seen another poster on these boards that refuses more advice than you--and you keep asking the same questions and trying to make the same uninformed points.
Click to expand...

If you had followed my comments a little more closely, you would have read multiple times where I strung up my 2 Londons with opposite hybrids. One had multi mains/poly cross. The other has poly mains/multi cross. I tried both and commented how I didn't like how I lost the soft feel I initially loved about the London with the poly mains. I also mentioned that next time I string, I will drop the tension more on the crosses. I don't have money to burn to try a different string every other day. Also, if I can't use a soft string in the mains than this racquet is not for me. I have never liked the way poly's in the mains felt and I also have never had a racquet before that was unplayable with some type of multi in the mains.

Also my first impressions have been wrong many times with other racquets, so I am not going to only go by my first impressions because you think it's a good idea. I know what works for me in that regard. Also, I have only tried 2 string setups so far, so I don't know yet if my first impressions were correct or not.

I haven't given up yet on the London. I am willing to try some of these suggestions, but am not crazy about using multi mains. There are a few more possibilities I plan on trying, but haven't had the time or money to restring yet. It is winter where I am and I am not playing as much as normal, so I am in no hurry. I just report my findings as they happen. But I am not going to rush.
 
Last edited:
P

Pneumated1

Hall of Fame
JackB1 said:
If you had followed my comments a little more closely, you would have read multiple times where I strung up my 2 Londons with opposite hybrids. One had multi mains/poly cross. The other has poly mains/multi cross. I tried both and commented how I didn't like how I lost the soft feel I initially loved about the London with the poly mains. I also mentioned that next time I string, I will drop the tension more on the crosses. I don't have money to burn to try a different string every other day. Also, if I can't use a soft string in the mains than this racquet is not for me. I have never liked the way poly's in the mains felt and I also have never had a racquet before that was unplayable with some type of multi in the mains.

Also my first impressions have been wrong many times with other racquets, so I am not going to only go by my first impressions because you think it's a good idea. I know what works for me in that regard. Also, I have only tried 2 string setups so far, so I don't know yet if my first impressions were correct or not.

I haven't given up yet on the London. I am willing to try some of these suggestions, but am not crazy about using multi mains. There are a few more possibilities I plan on trying, but haven't had the time or money to restring yet. It is winter where I am and I am not playing as much as normal, so I am in no hurry. I just report my findings as they happen. But I am not going to rush.
Click to expand...
)
Yeah, I recall that you tried different setups, but the one that's going to give you dwell time and therefore control is not an option for you. You've made that very clear, so what's the point of arguing that? Therefore, I think you'd be better off with another racket. As you may know, I've hit the 300 Tour for the past two years, and with this stick you can go full multi as low as you want and maintain pinpoint control. In fact, you need added weight and loose tensions just to get some extra pop. I'm surprised that you went away from this stick if "soft feel" and control are your uncompromising standards.

I'm just a believer that in sports, whether tennis or others, things shouldn't have to be this contrived to work out. And trust me, I can relate to your financial situation, which is why I would still rather pick up a few, used Londons (4 1/2) than new at this point. I can stock up later.

TennisMaverick said:
Better start copying and pasting info that you wish to save, because I bet that this thread will soon be gone soon as well.

BTW: Do you know the player named Cher Horowitz?
Click to expand...

I don't know the player, but I'm headed to look the name up right now.
 
S

skeeter

Professional
neverstopplaying said:
I strung it up with Genesis Typhoon mains (54) and Maxim Touch x's (56). Since I usually reduce my poly by 10%, this follows those that suggest lowering the x's in Volkls.
Click to expand...

Upon re-reading this, got a little confused. If your poly is in the mains and you are reducing it by 10%, how does that make your crosses lower than the mains per your tensions given above? I'm not familiar with these strings and just now starting to experiment with poly, so forgive any ignorance here. Thanks.
 
JackB1

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
skeeter said:
Upon re-reading this, got a little confused. If your poly is in the mains and you are reducing it by 10%, how does that make your crosses lower than the mains per your tensions given above? I'm not familiar with these strings and just now starting to experiment with poly, so forgive any ignorance here. Thanks.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I don't get that one either. The tensions make sense in that you usually want your multi 2-4 higher than your poly since its much more lively. But then (according to Volkl recommendations) you should reduce the crosses by a few more. So I would think maybe poly mains and multi crosses at the same tension would work or even a little less for the crosses? Maybe 54/54 or 54/52?
 
JackB1

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
I am going to try some Mantis Comfort Synthetic in the mains, w/ a copoly cross, as a last ditch try for a soft main string for the London. MCS is supposed to be a very low powered, but soft multi. I will try about 55# in the mains and 52# in the crosses. I just ordered the MCS so I should get it mid next week.

Head Rip Control might be another good candidate for a soft low powered main string for the London.
 
Last edited:
S

skeeter

Professional
JackB1 said:
I am going to try some Mantis Comfort Synthetic in the mains, w/ a copoly cross, as a last ditch try for a soft main string for the London. MCS is supposed to be a very low powered, but soft multi. I will try about 55# in the mains and 52# in the crosses. I just ordered the MCS so I should get it mid next week.

Head Rip Control might be another good candidate for a soft low powered main string for the London.
Click to expand...

Interesting; I ordered and just received some MCS as well. Been reading good things about it in the Strings forum, i.e., soft, lower powered, good feel. Also ordered some softer polys: WC Silverstring and Polystar Energy that I'll try along with the MCS. Will try what you did a while back: one racquet with poly mains, MCS as crosses; one just the reverse. Am still curious to find out if I use polys in the mains, if the the multi crosses should still be 2-4lbs lower, per my earlier question. Maybe string them fairly close as you suggested.
 
TennisMaverick

TennisMaverick

Banned
skeeter said:
Mav, Pneumated, NeverSP: any thoughts on this?
Click to expand...

As I have stated many times before, and again in comment #142:

"With that being said, assuming that poly is between 12-15% stiffer than a soft multi, and between 8-10% stiffer than gut, just factor those percentages into your hybrids, and no matter what numbers you arrive at, and then, subtract 2-4 lbs on the crosses--which is the Volkl standard recommendation for all DC/DNX frames. This will provide for the feel, softness, and dwell time for which the brand is famous. My personal preference is to find a balance between the crosses and mains where neither moves more than the other. This provides for a very consistent response off of the string bed."
 
P

Pneumated1

Hall of Fame
JackB1 said:
I am going to try some Mantis Comfort Synthetic in the mains, w/ a copoly cross, as a last ditch try for a soft main string for the London. MCS is supposed to be a very low powered, but soft multi. I will try about 55# in the mains and 52# in the crosses. I just ordered the MCS so I should get it mid next week.

Head Rip Control might be another good candidate for a soft low powered main string for the London.
Click to expand...

Unbelieveable Jack! You've got me scratching my head here. Do yourself a favor and don't try this setup; it will produce the same results that you don't favor now. Your objective to get the dwell/pocketing, and therefore control, that the London is known for is to create a consistent stringbed.

If you will be using MCS multi in the mains at 55#, then do the following: (1) For crosses, start at 55# and reduce the tension a minimum of 10%--to create a consistently stiff stringbed. This is a manufacturer's recommendation and will bring your crosses to 49.5-50#. (2) Simply drop the cross tension from here 2-4#. This is Volkl's recommendation for these frames, which will leave your final cross tension anywhere from 48/47.5-46/45.5. And that's a minimum: you could go 12-15% in step (1) depending upon how much stiffer the poly is than the mulit. You'll have to tinker with that. Therefore, based on your main tension, the racket should be strung at approximately 55 (mains) and 47 (crosses).

You can't play this racket with your previously stiff poly crosses and low tension, multi mains. Both are an equation that predicts a quick release from the stringbed (lack of control).

I hope you'll try this, and if not, I won't bug you any more. But please, if not, avoid coming into the thread comparing the London to the PD and the APD; they're just nothing alike.
 
ragingbull1980

ragingbull1980

Semi-Pro
JackB1 said:
I am going to try some Mantis Comfort Synthetic in the mains, w/ a copoly cross, as a last ditch try for a soft main string for the London. MCS is supposed to be a very low powered, but soft multi. I will try about 55# in the mains and 52# in the crosses. I just ordered the MCS so I should get it mid next week.

Head Rip Control might be another good candidate for a soft low powered main string for the London.
Click to expand...

Jack, have you ever tried just a straight up poly at a low tension say around 51 to 54. You may be surprised. Seems like you have tried everything else and can't seem to be satisfied so thought I would suggest full poly. Anyhow give it a try.
 
JackB1

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
ragingbull1980 said:
Jack, have you ever tried just a straight up poly at a low tension say around 51 to 54. You may be surprised. Seems like you have tried everything else and can't seem to be satisfied so thought I would suggest full poly. Anyhow give it a try.
Click to expand...

Not in the London. If I tried full poly, I would probably go even lower...like 45-50. Might be worth a shot. I have a couple other combos to try first though. Full poly scares my elbows! :)
 
JackB1

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
skeeter said:
Interesting; I ordered and just received some MCS as well. Been reading good things about it in the Strings forum, i.e., soft, lower powered, good feel. Also ordered some softer polys: WC Silverstring and Polystar Energy that I'll try along with the MCS. Will try what you did a while back: one racquet with poly mains, MCS as crosses; one just the reverse. Am still curious to find out if I use polys in the mains, if the the multi crosses should still be 2-4lbs lower, per my earlier question. Maybe string them fairly close as you suggested.
Click to expand...

Great. Let me know what you find out. I am thinking there will be a big difference in a high powered multil like NRG2 (what I've been using) and a low powered multi like the Mantis or Rip Control. If that doesn't work for me, then no multi in the mains will. Funny thing is the NRG2 mains when just strung work pretty well. It's just when tension drops a week or 2 later that it becomes a springboard.
 
JackB1

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
Pneumated1 said:
Unbelieveable Jack! You've got me scratching my head here. Do yourself a favor and don't try this setup; it will produce the same results that you don't favor now. Your objective to get the dwell/pocketing, and therefore control, that the London is known for is to create a consistent stringbed.

If you will be using MCS multi in the mains at 55#, then do the following: (1) For crosses, start at 55# and reduce the tension a minimum of 10%--to create a consistently stiff stringbed. This is a manufacturer's recommendation and will bring your crosses to 49.5-50#. (2) Simply drop the cross tension from here 2-4#. This is Volkl's recommendation for these frames, which will leave your final cross tension anywhere from 48/47.5-46/45.5. And that's a minimum: you could go 12-15% in step (1) depending upon how much stiffer the poly is than the mulit. You'll have to tinker with that. Therefore, based on your main tension, the racket should be strung at approximately 55 (mains) and 47 (crosses).

You can't play this racket with your previously stiff poly crosses and low tension, multi mains. Both are an equation that predicts a quick release from the stringbed (lack of control).

I hope you'll try this, and if not, I won't bug you any more. But please, if not, avoid coming into the thread comparing the London to the PD and the APD; they're just nothing alike.
Click to expand...

Please, don't feel like you're "bugging me". Thats why I come hear. To hear ideas and suggestions. I am going to try your suggestion of poly mains and multi cross, with the crosses lowered even more....I promise.

Here are 3 setups I am planning to try next:

1) Mantis Comfort mains @55 / WC Scorpion crosses @48
2) WC Scorpion mains @53 / Maxim Touch crosses @50
3) Full copoly - SP Hyperion - mains @52 / crosses @47

I have some natural gut I want to try also, but I don't know what configuration would work with nat gut in the London? Maybe as crosses with copoly mains?
 
neverstopplaying

neverstopplaying

Professional
skeeter said:
Upon re-reading this, got a little confused. If your poly is in the mains and you are reducing it by 10%, how does that make your crosses lower than the mains per your tensions given above? I'm not familiar with these strings and just now starting to experiment with poly, so forgive any ignorance here. Thanks.
Click to expand...

My poly mains are at 54. Normally this would mean that the non-poly hybrid would be at 60. Most don't go quite to 10% difference so let's say 58-60. Now if you want to reduce the crosses 3-4 lbs that means 54-57. This is why my crosses are at 56 with a multi.

Hope this clears it up.
 
P

Pneumated1

Hall of Fame
JackB1 said:
Here are 3 setups I am planning to try next:

1) Mantis Comfort mains @55 / WC Scorpion crosses @48
2) WC Scorpion mains @53 / Maxim Touch crosses @50
3) Full copoly - SP Hyperion - mains @52 / crosses @47

I have some natural gut I want to try also, but I don't know what configuration would work with nat gut in the London? Maybe as crosses with copoly mains?
Click to expand...

Your #1 above should work, but remember that it's based upon your desired multi tension of 55#. If you were to change that tension, apply the same "rules" (poly % drops and Volkl recommendations for crosses) and it should work for whatever tension you decide upon. If you like the "feel" of a multi main (Federer), then you should probably just stick with the setup (multi mains/poly crosses) and tweak until you find your most optimal base tension. Everything else "plays" off of that.

Your #2 above, don't forget that the same rules apply for the poly in the mains. If you want a consistent stringbed tension of 53 for the hybrid, then don't forget to reduce the tension in the poly mains by 12-15%. The result would be approximately 47-48# in the mains to make it consistent with a multi @ 53. Then you drop the cross tension in the multi 2-4# to approx. 50#. Therefore, you will have a stringbed of, let's say, 48# mains and 50# crosses, which will be in line with all manufacturer's recommendations for a stringbed at 53#.

#3 above, just keep it within the 2-4# drop on the crosses--maybe 52/49.

I would test these out first to determine once and for all which hybrid setup, or full poly, or full multi, works best for you. Then you'll know where to put the expensive gut without wasting $. But don't forget, the recommended % drop for poly, when using gut, is less than with a multi.

Sounds like a workable plan.
 
E

El Diablo

Guest
Might be time to give it up. Stage 4 of the Five Stage Racquet Grieving process is "the desperate search for a workable string setup." If it seems that string-sensitive, you'll never be happy with it. Every racquet I've ever been happy with works with various strings. Let go.
 
TennisMaverick

TennisMaverick

Banned
Pneumated1 said:
Unbelieveable Jack! You've got me scratching my head here. Do yourself a favor and don't try this setup; it will produce the same results that you don't favor now. Your objective to get the dwell/pocketing, and therefore control, that the London is known for is to create a consistent stringbed.

If you will be using MCS multi in the mains at 55#, then do the following: (1) For crosses, start at 55# and reduce the tension a minimum of 10%--to create a consistently stiff stringbed. This is a manufacturer's recommendation and will bring your crosses to 49.5-50#. (2) Simply drop the cross tension from here 2-4#. This is Volkl's recommendation for these frames, which will leave your final cross tension anywhere from 48/47.5-46/45.5. And that's a minimum: you could go 12-15% in step (1) depending upon how much stiffer the poly is than the mulit. You'll have to tinker with that. Therefore, based on your main tension, the racket should be strung at approximately 55 (mains) and 47 (crosses).

You can't play this racket with your previously stiff poly crosses and low tension, multi mains. Both are an equation that predicts a quick release from the stringbed (lack of control).

I hope you'll try this, and if not, I won't bug you any more. But please, if not, avoid coming into the thread comparing the London to the PD and the APD; they're just nothing alike.
Click to expand...

How much per hour do you charge for math tutoring?
 
TennisMaverick

TennisMaverick

Banned
El Diablo said:
Might be time to give it up. Stage 4 of the Five Stage Racquet Grieving process is "the desperate search for a workable string setup." If it seems that string-sensitive, you'll never be happy with it. Every racquet I've ever been happy with works with various strings. Let go.
Click to expand...

Excellent post!
 
P

Pneumated1

Hall of Fame
El Diablo said:
Might be time to give it up. Stage 4 of the Five Stage Racquet Grieving process is "the desperate search for a workable string setup." If it seems that string-sensitive, you'll never be happy with it. Every racquet I've ever been happy with works with various strings. Let go.
Click to expand...

If you let go, save me a few bucks by keeping me in mind.

TennisMaverick said:
How much per hour do you charge for math tutoring?
Click to expand...

Now there's an idea for extra $ to feed the kids, until I try to sell it with degrees in English Lit. and Theology.

TennisMaverick said:
Have you seen him...her play?
Click to expand...

Stop, you're killing me!
 
JackB1

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
Pneumated1 said:
Your #1 above should work, but remember that it's based upon your desired multi tension of 55#. If you were to change that tension, apply the same "rules" (poly % drops and Volkl recommendations for crosses) and it should work for whatever tension you decide upon. If you like the "feel" of a multi main (Federer), then you should probably just stick with the setup (multi mains/poly crosses) and tweak until you find your most optimal base tension. Everything else "plays" off of that.

Your #2 above, don't forget that the same rules apply for the poly in the mains. If you want a consistent stringbed tension of 53 for the hybrid, then don't forget to reduce the tension in the poly mains by 12-15%. The result would be approximately 47-48# in the mains to make it consistent with a multi @ 53. Then you drop the cross tension in the multi 2-4# to approx. 50#. Therefore, you will have a stringbed of, let's say, 48# mains and 50# crosses, which will be in line with all manufacturer's recommendations for a stringbed at 53#.

#3 above, just keep it within the 2-4# drop on the crosses--maybe 52/49.

I would test these out first to determine once and for all which hybrid setup, or full poly, or full multi, works best for you. Then you'll know where to put the expensive gut without wasting $. But don't forget, the recommended % drop for poly, when using gut, is less than with a multi.

Sounds like a workable plan.
Click to expand...

OK, here's the "latest" :)

I played today with my London with copoly (Hyperion) mains and multi crosses and it actually played quite nice. Sure, it's not as soft feeling as multi mains, but the power was very manageable and it was nice to swing out when I wanted without the ball hitting the back fence :) I was able to hit nice deep rally balls with good pace pretty easily. So I think I am headed in the right direction. This was my original setup that was strung at 52 mains/54 cross, so next time I will apply the "rules" and go even lower on the crosses. This was encouraging and if the Mantis string in the mains are still too lively, I can always have this to fall back on. One thing is for certain...a lively multi like NRG2 won't work in this racquet unless you string very tight and that will take away from the racquet's desirable characteristics. This also tells me I don't need to even bother with my #3 choice which was full copoly. A copoly/multi hybrid will work just fine.

On a sidenote, I went back and reread TW's review on the London and there were 3 or 4 mentions of "catapult effect" or "trampoline effect" or losing control when swinging out and these guys playtest for months, so I know it's not just me. I guess some racquets just aren't meant for multi's? Yes, it's a little more work for me to find the right setup with the London, but in the end it will be worth it. The swingweight, balance and flex of this racquet are just perfect for me.
 
prjacobs

prjacobs

Hall of Fame
So Londoners:). I've been following the various threads through better and worse, bitter and sweet, war and peace. Here's a question for the London club.
I've been using the dunlop 4D500 tour, with babolat 16 gauge gut, strung @ 60 lbs, right in the middle of the tension range. The 4D 500 is very powerful, but with it's 16 X 18 pattern, I find the spin I create allows me to swing out and bring the ball down into the court. I initially didn't make a conscious decision to go for more spin, but as I hit harder and harder with 4D 500 tour, the racquet head speed just seemed to put a lot of action on the ball. My question is, wouldn't I have the same experience with the London. It apparently applies a great amount of spin to the ball, and my hope is that like the 4D 500 tour, that would keep the ball in the court, but not make my shoulder suffer.
Thanks,
Paul
 
JackB1

JackB1

G.O.A.T.
prjacobs said:
So Londoners:). I've been following the various threads through better and worse, bitter and sweet, war and peace. Here's a question for the London club.
I've been using the dunlop 4D500 tour, with babolat 16 gauge gut, strung @ 60 lbs, right in the middle of the tension range. The 4D 500 is very powerful, but with it's 16 X 18 pattern, I find the spin I create allows me to swing out and bring the ball down into the court. I initially didn't make a conscious decision to go for more spin, but as I hit harder and harder with 4D 500 tour, the racquet head speed just seemed to put a lot of action on the ball. My question is, wouldn't I have the same experience with the London. It apparently applies a great amount of spin to the ball, and my hope is that like the 4D 500 tour, that would keep the ball in the court, but not make my shoulder suffer.
Thanks,
Paul
Click to expand...

I have tried the 500Tour and I can offer maybe a little insight. The London and the 500T have similar swingweights but the Dunlop is a much more stiff racquet. The London has slightly less power, but not too much. The biggest difference will be the way the ball feels off the stringbed. The only way to know for sure is to demo it. The London and the 500 Tour probably require slightly different swing types to maximize results. I would say the 500T is closer to the PB9 in that respect. The London should be a pretty easy transition for you, but without knowing how you play, it's tough to say which would work better for you. It's definitley worth a shot! It's a sweet feeling racquet and is DEFINITELY easier on your arm than the Dunlop.
 
prjacobs

prjacobs

Hall of Fame
Thanks Jack. If I can generate the same spin with the London, I see no problem controlling the ball.
 
Last edited:
P

Pneumated1

Hall of Fame
JackB1 said:
This was my original setup that was strung at 52 mains/54 cross, so next time I will apply the "rules" and go even lower on the crosses. This was encouraging and if the Mantis string in the mains are still too lively, I can always have this to fall back on. One thing is for certain...a lively multi like NRG2 won't work in this racquet unless you string very tight and that will take away from the racquet's desirable characteristics.
Click to expand...

The rules are already applied to your 52/54 setup. You're playing with a base stringbed of approx. 57-58#. Take 10-12% off of 57/58 and you're dead on with your mains currently. Subtract 2-4# from your crosses at the base tension, and you're dead on with your crosses currently.

I want to make sure you understand this, because you don't need to "apply the rules and go even lower on the crosses"--unless you want to drop your base tension a bit to create a softer stringbed. I would almost recommend trying this setup with a base, main tension at 53#, which, after the rules, would give you a setup of 47/48#(mains) and 50# (crosses). Or somewhere between the two.

But like Maverick rightly said in another post, people hit Volkl/BB for the feel. It's addictive. The first time I hit a C-10 Pro I knew that I could never look back! My point is this: why compromise on the feel with the London if you don't like a poly main? If "the Mantis strings in the mains are too lively," establish a higher main tension until you get control and keep working the numbers. If you can't find an acceptable compromise between feel/control/ball quality, then walk away; it's not the racket for you.

And the racket would perform admirably with a full NRG2 bed at high tensions, maybe just not for you. If someone were to go 65/62 with NRG2 and found acceptable feel/control/quality, then the racket would definitely be playing according to its inherent characteristics. That's why the ranges exist. But can you find your place within that range and still allow the racket to perform as specified? Well, I know you're giving it an effort! Good luck.
 
P

Pneumated1

Hall of Fame
prjacobs said:
So Londoners:). I've been following the various threads through better and worse, bitter and sweet, war and peace. Here's a question for the London club.
I've been using the dunlop 4D500 tour, with babolat 16 gauge gut, strung @ 60 lbs, right in the middle of the tension range. The 4D 500 is very powerful, but with it's 16 X 18 pattern, I find the spin I create allows me to swing out and bring the ball down into the court. I initially didn't make a conscious decision to go for more spin, but as I hit harder and harder with 4D 500 tour, the racquet head speed just seemed to put a lot of action on the ball. My question is, wouldn't I have the same experience with the London. It apparently applies a great amount of spin to the ball, and my hope is that like the 4D 500 tour, that would keep the ball in the court, but not make my shoulder suffer.
Thanks,
Paul
Click to expand...

Hey prjacobs, like a told you earlier in the week, and I'll continue with the same tune, it's the best in its class. The only holdup I see is that your description of your game with the 500 Tour sounds like you're a "Brusher"--a heavy topspinner, Nadal/Roddick type player. Would that be correct? If so, I'm sure you could hit the London, but you wouldn't utilize, with the same efficiency, the characteristic dwell-time of the frame. Brushers prefer and best utilize a powerful stick that is quick off the stringbed (PD and probably the 500 Tour)--and you get away with it because you apply so much powerful spin. The "Pressurer" (Connors) and "Grinder" (Federer) utilize the London much better because they're both "flatish" hitters and utilize the inherent dwell-time and pocketing of the ball into the stringbed---as they, in a sense, hold the ball. That's where this type of player gains control with the London--in the dwell. I'm a "Grinder" and I had almost as much control with the London as my 300 Tours---and that was with a demo of loose syn. gut, which bust on me after 3 sets. But the ball quality of the 300 Tour couldn't compare with the London. Demo and see. Good luck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

G
Pure Storm VS BB London
Replies
4
Views
841
danix
D
B
More Powerful and Comfortable? V1 Classic or BB London
Replies
4
Views
444
Cengusiento
Cengusiento
M
Boris Becker Delta Core London?
Replies
33
Views
6K
Double_Bagel
D
TennisMaverick
BB London Tour vs PB10 Mid
Replies
39
Views
6K
TennisMaverick
TennisMaverick
M
PB10 Mid or BB London Tour
Replies
16
Views
1K
RiggensAuroraHO
R
Top