Ltec results by tw professor

kiteboard

Banned
4s rated #1 in a full bed (the only way the tw tests) in spin, and os rated #3 in control, while 4s was #18 in control, not in hybrid as rec. by Ltec.
http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/learning_center/stringfinder/stringfinder.php

Check for control results by changing it from spin at top. I find it interesting, that a string they don't even rec. as their spin string, tested #1 at 6.7, and not hybrid as rec. by the man. Os in a full bed was #3. But not tested in the hybrid. Isn't that why we all hybrid anyway? When will tw start testing hybrids? How about it, tw?
 
Last edited:

arche3

Banned
I've a notion to string up a 4s/0s hybrid now. A bit more pop and some more spin probably this way. Actually GoSurferBoy liked it like this.

4s is a very slippery string though. it does not even have a coating like rpm does.
 

pvaudio

Legend
Yes, I'm supposed to trust their results when L-Tec posts the highest number ever, and Babolat VS Touch (Wilson NG 16) has the lowest number ever. Let's think about this for a moment: the most elastic string you can buy produces less spin than even the most atrocious tournament nylon strings? Are you kidding me?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

CDestroyer

Professional
4s rated #1 in a full bed (the only way the tw tests) in spin, and os rated #3 in control, while 4s was #18 in control, not in hybrid as rec. by Ltec.
http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/learning_center/stringfinder/stringfinder.php

Check for control results by changing it from spin at top. I find it interesting, that a string they don't even rec. as their spin string, tested #1 at 6.7, and not hybrid as rec. by the man. Os in a full bed was #3. But not tested in the hybrid. Isn't that why we all hybrid anyway? When will tw start testing hybrids? How about it, tw?

Too many hybrid possibilities. Too expensive.
 

pvaudio

Legend
Mikeler will love this one: NRG2 produces the same amount of spin as Luxilon Monotec poly. Need I go further?
 

pvaudio

Legend
Actually, let me make this plain: their results are garbage. Their power and control ratings are based on one metric: stiffness. Control, in their eyes, is higher stiffness. What that means is that the higher the stiffness rating of the string, the higher it goes on their control list. Look at the power list. The lower the stiffness (which they call softness erroneously), the more power. Look at them side by side: the lists are the exact same, only inverted. Let me put that another way: Wilson Natural Gut 17g has the worst control of all strings tested, but is the most powerful. That is the original VS Team formulation.
 

arche3

Banned
Yes, I'm supposed to trust their results when L-Tec posts the highest number ever, and Babolat VS Touch (Wilson NG 16) has the lowest number ever. Let's think about this for a moment: the most elastic string you can buy produces less spin than even the most atrocious tournament nylon strings? Are you kidding me?

Have you doubted the TW Professor testing before? Where are your tests to disprove TW professor?

Also, a full bed of natural gut is not the most spin friendly string. so yeah a nylon can conceivably have more spin potential while still being a crappy string. Elastic gut does not mean its spin potential is very high. We are not talking hybrids obviously.

Just because 4s tested high in spin potential does not mean TW professor thinks its a great string. It just fit the data collected.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

arche3

Banned
Actually, let me make this plain: their results are garbage. Their power and control ratings are based on one metric: stiffness. Control, in their eyes, is higher stiffness. What that means is that the higher the stiffness rating of the string, the higher it goes on their control list. Look at the power list. The lower the stiffness (which they call softness erroneously), the more power. Look at them side by side: the lists are the exact same, only inverted. Let me put that another way: Wilson Natural Gut 17g has the worst control of all strings tested, but is the most powerful. That is the original VS Team formulation.

what criteria do you think they should use? stiffness seems like a appropriate one. polys have more control than multi and gut because its stiffer. not just Ltec. all polys are stiffer than gut. and yes all polys are more control oriented than gut.
 

pvaudio

Legend
Have you doubted the TW Professor testing before? Where are your tests to disprove TW professor?

Also, a full bed of natural gut is not the most spin friendly string. so yeah a nylon can conceivably have more spin potential while still being a crappy string. Elastic gut does not mean its spin potential is very high. We are not talking hybrids obviously.

Just because 4s tested high in spin potential does not mean TW professor thinks its a great string. It just fit the data collected.
Where are my results? With all due respect, are you seriously this dense? The hallmark, and why it has been the flagship benchmark for literally more than a century of tennis is because natural gut does everything well. EVERYTHING. Other string types do better in certain areas, but they certainly do worse than gut. It's for that specific excellence that you'd choose it over gut. But if you can honestly sit there and tell me that the reference standard brand of the reference standard string produces the least amount of spin, then I'm sorry. That's all I can say: I'm just sorry.
 

fgs

Hall of Fame
1. i admit of not heaving read the testing methodology, but while i find any kind of experiments interesting and informative, i do always take them with a grain of salt. we had been discussing these things in other threads as well, and i think there will basically be no end to this discussion, as it is impossible to scientifically replicate everything that happens in real tennis life under lab conditions.

2. it is interesting though to find out that these l-tec strings seems to have sparked a multi-cross-thread debate and both sides seem not willing to admit a simple fact: it IS possible that some people like the strings and that they fit well with the stick they use, as well as it IS possible that some other people don't like the strings, as a matter of fact, any of the strings they have in their offer. please understand that i am here talking only about the strings and not about the marketing nor the pricing of them.

3. the pricing is indeed pretty high, but as i already mentioned in another thread, if a player hits rather flat and thus does not break strings very often, the (claimed) additional playability is maybe worth the money, as it might be possible to really get to 35 hitting hours. as i personally play with heavy topspin, i seriously doubt i would get more than 8-10 hours out of it until it breaks, so for me it basically is no choice - nevertheless, i will sometime in the second half of this year buy some sets and try them out myself.

4. personally i am rather immune to the marketing and advertising claims of any company. some indeed are going too far with their claims and i have to admit that building in the excuses - it has not been strung properly and/or you are not at the appropriate level to realize the advantages of these strings - are not to my taste. but every company is free to make fools of themselves as they please. right now there comes to mind a racket manufacturer that tried to imply you get more kontrol with a certain stick - while basically the claim is correct, i do think that only 0.1% of the worldwide tennis players are able to really experience this, and interestingly only one is in the top 100 atp, admittedly quite at the top currently, having run the show for a very long time.:)
 

pvaudio

Legend
what criteria do you think they should use? stiffness seems like a appropriate one. polys have more control than multi and gut because its stiffer. not just Ltec. all polys are stiffer than gut. and yes all polys are more control oriented than gut.
Okay yeah, you are this dense. Forget I said anything, clearly simple thought is not going on today. Stiffness and compliance are material properties, not measures of control or power. What you just said is that it makes sense that for over 100 years, people have been using the most unwieldy tennis string material that exists. Just sit there and think about that.
 

arche3

Banned
Where are my results? With all due respect, are you seriously this dense? The hallmark, and why it has been the flagship benchmark for literally more than a century of tennis is because natural gut does everything well. EVERYTHING. Other string types do better in certain areas, but they certainly do worse than gut. It's for that specific excellence that you'd choose it over gut. But if you can honestly sit there and tell me that the reference standard brand of the reference standard string produces the least amount of spin, then I'm sorry. That's all I can say: I'm just sorry.

So you think VS gut produces more spin than Alu rough? Or BHBR? Or any other smooth poly for that matter? I strongly disagree. I played with full gut for years. to get decent spin potential like poly you need to string very very high. Thus stiffening the string bed. Lowering the power of the strings.

But I think the point your arguing is you cant believe 4s ltec has more spin potential than another poly. And you use the fact that VS gut is rated the lowest spin potential as your reasons why 4s ltec cannot possibly have the highest spin potential.

where does the faulty testing start? At ltec or when its reaches RPM blast.
so if you throw out the top 5 spin potential strings would you accept the rest?
 

arche3

Banned
Okay yeah, you are this dense. Forget I said anything, clearly simple thought is not going on today. Stiffness and compliance are material properties, not measures of control or power. What you just said is that it makes sense that for over 100 years, people have been using the most unwieldy tennis string material that exists. Just sit there and think about that.

it has nothing to do with what I think. If your saying the testing is false you need to say why. And why the methods are wrong. the methods they seem to use is stiffness. What is your method? Just saying because cow gut existed before poly is not a valid argument.

And why are you calling me names? I am asking valid questions. I do not recall EVER slandering you here.
 

mad dog1

G.O.A.T.
Where are my results? With all due respect, are you seriously this dense? The hallmark, and why it has been the flagship benchmark for literally more than a century of tennis is because natural gut does everything well. EVERYTHING. Other string types do better in certain areas, but they certainly do worse than gut. It's for that specific excellence that you'd choose it over gut. But if you can honestly sit there and tell me that the reference standard brand of the reference standard string produces the least amount of spin, then I'm sorry. That's all I can say: I'm just sorry.

i guess i have to wonder if gut does everything so well, why have most of the pros switched to poly? haven't some retired pros stated that poly changed the game because it allowed players to hit with more spin, more control and sharper angles that weren't possible w/ gut strings?
 

pvaudio

Legend
So you think VS gut produces more spin than Alu rough? Or BHBR? Or any other smooth poly for that matter? I strongly disagree. I played with full gut for years. to get decent spin potential like poly you need to string very very high. Thus stiffening the string bed. Lowering the power of the strings.

But I think the point your arguing is you cant believe 4s ltec has more spin potential than another poly. And you use the fact that VS gut is rated the lowest spin potential as your reasons why 4s ltec cannot possibly have the highest spin potential.

where does the faulty testing start? At ltec or when its reaches RPM blast.
so if you throw out the top 5 spin potential strings would you accept the rest?
This is just a combination of straw men (your first sentence) and putting words in my mouth. I have not even mentioned L-Tec. Not once. I'm not even arguing about L-Tec. I'm talking about the testing methodology. The results that they have make. no. sense. Their spin potential metric I actually tested in my thread. It's the ratio of ball-string friction and string-string friction. Higher ball bite and less string friction = more spin. That's a legitimate notion. In the real world? Not true. Not even remotely true. They said that Barb Wire has the highest ball-string friction, so I used that in my mains. I then used a smooth poly (I believe WC Mosquito Bite?) cross. The real-world spin generated was worlds less than a BHBR/gut hybrid.

I like science. I like it a lot in fact. As I've often said, however, using science and math to quantify purely real-world phenomena is not possible. There are too many variables that you have to ignore which can make all of the difference in the world. That's why I go by playtests instead of lab numbers. Those numbers do not hold up outside of the lab.
 

Power Player

Bionic Poster
Yes Mad Dog this is true, but tons of pros still use gut with poly instead of full poly beds.

the best overall string to this day is still gut which is what PVaudio is saying.
 

pvaudio

Legend
it has nothing to do with what I think. If your saying the testing is false you need to say why. And why the methods are wrong. the methods they seem to use is stiffness. What is your method? Just saying because cow gut existed before poly is not a valid argument.

And why are you calling me names? I am asking valid questions. I do not recall EVER slandering you here.
I sincerely apologize for the name calling. This is just incredibly frustrating that it seems that the most obvious facts in the world are falling on deaf ears. The reason why is what I already stated: stiffness, and compliance (compliance = 1/stiffness) are not metrics of subjective phenomena. A stiffer string does not yield more control on the court. A less stiff string does not yield less control on the court. It just doesn't happen for the reasons I listed in my above post: you cannot quantify these phenomena using math alone. It is impossible, and seeing that they equate power and control as inverses makes me discount the results entirely.
 

pvaudio

Legend
i guess i have to wonder if gut does everything so well, why have most of the pros switched to poly? haven't some retired pros stated that poly changed the game because it allowed players to hit with more spin, more control and sharper angles that weren't possible w/ gut strings?
You simply bolded part of my quote, and then ignored the rest of it as Power Player just pointed out. I'm not even going to get started then.
 

arche3

Banned
I sincerely apologize for the name calling. This is just incredibly frustrating that it seems that the most obvious facts in the world are falling on deaf ears. The reason why is what I already stated: stiffness, and compliance (compliance = 1/stiffness) are not metrics of subjective phenomena. A stiffer string does not yield more control on the court. A less stiff string does not yield less control on the court. It just doesn't happen for the reasons I listed in my above post: you cannot quantify these phenomena using math alone. It is impossible, and seeing that they equate power and control as inverses makes me discount the results entirely.

ok no worries. I don't believe most string tests anyways. Just general ideas I get from the scientific tests.

I do agree Gut/Poly hybrid is the spinniest. But full poly still has more control than gut/poly. Just from playing the strings.
 

pvaudio

Legend
But I think the point your arguing is you cant believe 4s ltec has more spin potential than another poly. And you use the fact that VS gut is rated the lowest spin potential as your reasons why 4s ltec cannot possibly have the highest spin potential.
Since you didn't seem to notice this post and it disproves what you've been trying to assign me to, please look on the first page where I said this:

Mikeler will love this one: NRG2 produces the same amount of spin as Luxilon Monotec poly. Need I go further?

Look on their list, and you will see that by their lab measurements, NRG2 and Luxilon Monotec have the same spin potential. Please explain this, and then tell me why I'm out of my mind for thinking their results are questionable. Posting a list of numbers is one thing. Assigning qualities to them is where they went wrong.
 

Up&comer

Hall of Fame
Good lord. This whole L-tec thing needs to stop. PV was simply stating that the results were, quite frankly, incorrect. I can tell you, for sure, that Wilson gut has more spin than some nylon. Regardless of what your lab tests may say, regardless of the outcome of some arbitrary test, lab tests will never be as conclusive as real world tests. You cannot quantify the playability of a string by a lab test. The results are just that; lab tests. Not court time with a tennis player, they measurements of stiffness, energy return, etc...

I appreciate TW trying to help understand the physics of tennis, but lab tests do not correlate into real world results.
 

arche3

Banned
This is just a combination of straw men (your first sentence) and putting words in my mouth. I have not even mentioned L-Tec. Not once. I'm not even arguing about L-Tec. I'm talking about the testing methodology. The results that they have make. no. sense. Their spin potential metric I actually tested in my thread. It's the ratio of ball-string friction and string-string friction. Higher ball bite and less string friction = more spin. That's a legitimate notion. In the real world? Not true. Not even remotely true. They said that Barb Wire has the highest ball-string friction, so I used that in my mains. I then used a smooth poly (I believe WC Mosquito Bite?) cross. The real-world spin generated was worlds less than a BHBR/gut hybrid.

I like science. I like it a lot in fact. As I've often said, however, using science and math to quantify purely real-world phenomena is not possible. There are too many variables that you have to ignore which can make all of the difference in the world. That's why I go by playtests instead of lab numbers. Those numbers do not hold up outside of the lab.

but the fact is true the main ideas of these tests are more or less true.

Poly is more spinny than VS gut. that is pretty much true imo. the main facts forwarded by TW prof are in fact valid. Just because you found a couple of personal examples that do not live up to the data does not make the data false. the trends are true. And we will all hit different so the exact results will vary.
 

arche3

Banned
Since you didn't seem to notice this post and it disproves what you've been trying to assign me to, please look on the first page where I said this:



Look on their list, and you will see that by their lab measurements, NRG2 and Luxilon Monotec have the same spin potential. Please explain this, and then tell me why I'm out of my mind for thinking their results are questionable. Posting a list of numbers is one thing. Assigning qualities to them is where they went wrong.

I think the data is just data. Potential for spin based on string friction. Discounting form and technique. I have no idea how they measure it. Its just raw data. Does not make it wrong. Its just what it is.
 

arche3

Banned
I sincerely apologize for the name calling. This is just incredibly frustrating that it seems that the most obvious facts in the world are falling on deaf ears. The reason why is what I already stated: stiffness, and compliance (compliance = 1/stiffness) are not metrics of subjective phenomena. A stiffer string does not yield more control on the court. A less stiff string does not yield less control on the court. It just doesn't happen for the reasons I listed in my above post: you cannot quantify these phenomena using math alone. It is impossible, and seeing that they equate power and control as inverses makes me discount the results entirely.

I would imagine if we looked at your own string test thread we will find a correlation between string stiffness and control in your reviews.

Is it perfect? no. But it does add a significant factor imo.
 

pvaudio

Legend
Good lord. This whole L-tec thing needs to stop. PV was simply stating that the results were, quite frankly, incorrect. I can tell you, for sure, that Wilson gut has more spin than some nylon. Regardless of what your lab tests may say, regardless of the outcome of some arbitrary test, lab tests will never be as conclusive as real world tests. You cannot quantify the playability of a string by a lab test. The results are just that; lab tests. Not court time with a tennis player, they measurements of stiffness, energy return, etc...

I appreciate TW trying to help understand the physics of tennis, but lab tests do not correlate into real world results.
My goodness, thank you. It really is just this simple.
 

pvaudio

Legend
I would imagine if we looked at your own string test thread we will find a correlation between string stiffness and control in your reviews.

Is it perfect? no. But it does add a significant factor imo.
Actually, you would not, at least not in the sense you're implying. Why? Because those with the most control have always been 50% natural gut. The reason why gut is so great for control is because it's predictable. By design, polyester doesn't come even close. It's not made with feel in mind. It's made to generate spin at low power so that you can swing harder, generate more RPMs and keep the ball in. Control is not the same thing as spin. I think you would agree. Control is definitely therefore not a high amount of stiffness either. It's being able to do what you wish with the ball, and natural gut does that better than any other string type. Poly does this well in a passive sense only because it is low powered and creates a lot of spin. There is a reason why natural gut is unparalled for touch shots: it's what I just stated. Control is not defined by a number.
 
Last edited:

pvaudio

Legend
I think the data is just data. Potential for spin based on string friction. Discounting form and technique. I have no idea how they measure it. Its just raw data. Does not make it wrong. Its just what it is.
You must be arguing for the sake of arguing. I just said this. I said posting a list of numbers is one thing. Assigning meaning to those numbers is where it becomes wrong. There is nothing wrong with the numbers. It's the deductions and implications that are being asserted that are simply false.
 

arche3

Banned
You must be arguing for the sake of arguing. I just said this. I said posting a list of numbers is one thing. Assigning meaning to those numbers is where it becomes wrong. There is nothing wrong with the numbers. It's the deductions and implications that are being asserted that are simply false.

you were saying the data was wrong. For example. Gut has less string to string friction than the one above it. I was talking about the data the whole time. The original post of this thread is spin potential. ? The data. You said it was false because gut has more spin than nylon.
 

fortun8son

Hall of Fame
This is no different than the ongoing debate about the RSI lab tests.
There is nothing wrong with the data or methodology.
It's in assigning subjective values such as power/control or comfort/harshness to these numbers that we run into trouble.
There is a general correlation, but there are also many exceptions.
 

Torres

Banned
The summary of this thread: the same 4 guys keep posting how good l-tec strings are.

There's actually only 3 of them (the old man with the pieces of blue straws in his stringbed, the 15 year old kid, and the 3.5 guy), but yes, its the same old groupies with the same old brainwashed propaganda.
 

arche3

Banned
There's actually only 3 of them (the old man with the pieces of blue straws in his stringbed, the 15 year old kid, and the 3.5 guy), but yes, its the same old groupies with the same old brainwashed propaganda.

hi tournes! I was wondering when the homeless man would show up.
 

kiteboard

Banned
From the guy who has never tried the string. If anyone listens to this guy, when he admits he's never tried it, or pv, who has never tried the rec. hybrid: os/4s for control, or my rec> bhbr/os, then you deserve what you get: opinion based propaganda based on hatred of a bad marketing campaign, not the strings themselves. I for one, care about the results I get, and gut is best overall, namely: vs team/alu or vs/os for power/feel/touch/control, than os/4s. It also depends on the ra of your frame, your spin style, your frame speed, your tension likes. Give that data to me, and I can tell you which string/frame/tension/ra to use for your best result. And if I were running ltec, I'd go to tw about the slanderous comments that are being made by this fool. Been stringing since 81, thousands of jobs, in all sorts of frames/styles/tensions/experiments. I don't appreciate the lack of respect from such, but understand it alright. Just another keyboard fool who is angry about something else so he takes it out on a marketing style, and ignores all else. If I made some of the best, let alone the best poly, I would want to mark it up too. But I am a businessman and understand mark up more than those who don't.
 
Last edited:

pvaudio

Legend
Did you seriously, and I mean seriously just put me in the same boat as Torres regarding L-Tec (with no offense to Torres as even arche3 knows he's stirring the pot on purpose)? And in doing so, did you also seriously use one of the reasons I'm not a huge fan of their marketing: being able to claim I simply tried the wrong combination of their products? Believe it or not, kiteboard, there are those among us who do not have the money to even begin to think about trying innumerable L-Tec hybrids, or buying multiple reels of BHBR to simply test which hybrid works best, or going through sets and sets of natural gut only to cut them out after a few days. Tennis Warehouse, which is I fully and have stated many times, a fantastic retailer, is a carrier of these strings. They do not post the stringing technique. They do not post the recommended hybrids. They post only that they are for sale. That's it. If they do that, then it begs the question: are the strings not meant for sale for the general public, or only those who know of a DIFFERENT retailer's website to get the specific information needed to get the most out of the product?

I was completely fair in my L-Tec review. I have L-Tec in my frame right now. It's not for me. It's not terrible, it's just not for me. No spreadsheet can tell me how my physiology will respond to a certain string setup. I just have to try it. I tried one of the recommended hybrids the first time around. Didn't think it was special. So, I said that it was nice, but nothing out of the ordinary. It was only when the concept of value, which you do not seem to understand, came into the picture that people were in an uproar. There are juniors on here, college students, college grads, full-on adults and all the way through retirees on this forum. I would wager the first three groups don't have the time and money to try 171 different string setups (assuming you only choose to do the mains and crosses one way, but if I do choose to include switching, you can almost double that number) when each stringbed costs $20. So you can talk all day long about how void my opinion is, but don't begin to suggest that what I'm saying is negative propaganda simply because unlike yourself, I cannot afford to keep trying $20 stringbeds when TW doesn't even post any recommended setups themselves.

Oh, and in case you're wondering, 171 combinations wasn't a number I typed out of frustration. That is a true figure, and would be higher if this were GG. I only used what TW has as inventory.
 
Last edited:

tistrapukcipeht

Professional
4s rated #1 in a full bed (the only way the tw tests) in spin, and os rated #3 in control, while 4s was #18 in control, not in hybrid as rec. by Ltec.
http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/learning_center/stringfinder/stringfinder.php

Check for control results by changing it from spin at top. I find it interesting, that a string they don't even rec. as their spin string, tested #1 at 6.7, and not hybrid as rec. by the man. Os in a full bed was #3. But not tested in the hybrid. Isn't that why we all hybrid anyway? When will tw start testing hybrids? How about it, tw?

That's is because they have not tested Yonex Poly Tour Spin :).

Seriously, if you buy string based in these tests you are crazy.

Second, this test or whatever it may be, doesn't make any sense, some multi generating more spin than a poly??

This test and results are suspicious and fishy, maybe it has to do with promoting the brand or something.
 

The Big Kahuna

Hall of Fame
Let's see..spend 20 bucks on some poly string or spend a little more and have natural gut.

I know what I'll do.

...OR spend $20. and have a Pacific Classic 17g natural gut / MSV Co-Focus 18g poly hybrid that smokes it flat out in every aspect.

Seriously. It's plastic!
 

The Big Kahuna

Hall of Fame
You might all find this interesting, as well. From an article by Joshua Speckman in Tennis Player Magazine this month:

"Federer is one of the few pros today that played with full natural gut for a significant part of his career. He was pretty good with it too, beating Sampras at Wimbledon in 2001 with a full bed of gut. So why did he add copoly strings to the mix?"

"Spin control," answers Ferguson. "Spin is part of control, and he gains both. Definitely more spin, and with that comes control. And with that control he can string way down low. He strings at 21.5 or 22 kilos (47 or 48.5 pounds)," he adds."

"Federer's setup actually bears some resemblance to spaghetti strings, as that invention also used natural gut in the mains and a synthetic in the crosses. Many players find the combination of extremely elastic gut mains with stiff, hard and slick copoly crosses to be as, or more, spin-friendly than a full bed of copoly, while also being more comfortable, powerful and giving better feel for the ball."

"In string-on-string friction tests, tennis equipment researcher Crawford Lindsey found that gut mains slide with less friction along copoly crosses than any other string or string combination. And he found that - unlike other strings, where notching ramps up friction and disables the snapback mechanism – inter-string friction actually gets lower as the notches get deeper."

"Why? Natural oils seep out of the gut at the notches and lubricate the string intersections. This suggests that a gut/poly hybrid might retain its spin-generating potential for longer than any other string or combination. Well, at least until the gut breaks."

"Surprisingly, the opposite configuration – poly mains/gut crosses – slides much less easily. Lindsey says the two materials are sticky in reverse perhaps because the surface of the gut crosses quickly abrades, pulling up microscopic fibers that get hung up on the copoly mains as they try to slide."

The full article can be found on Tennisplayer.net.

Other referenced articles on the subject in this article that may be useful or of interest:

Crawford Lindsey, aka "The Professor", has published the most through, useful and up-to-date collection of scientific papers on strings and spin available. For those who want to learn more about the subject, or about other aspects of tennis equipment, there's no better resource.
C. Lindsey's Tennis Warehouse University
Lindsey's groundbreaking experiments on strings and spin:
"What Strings Generate the Most Spin?"
"Spin and String Pattern"
"String Friction Database"
"Spin and String Stiffness"
"String Lubrication & Movement in Spin"
 

mixedmedia

Professional
Did you seriously, and I mean seriously just put me in the same boat as Torres regarding L-Tec (with no offense to Torres as even arche3 knows he's stirring the pot on purpose)? And in doing so, did you also seriously use one of the reasons I'm not a huge fan of their marketing: being able to claim I simply tried the wrong combination of their products? Believe it or not, kiteboard, there are those among us who do not have the money to even begin to think about trying innumerable L-Tec hybrids, or buying multiple reels of BHBR to simply test which hybrid works best, or going through sets and sets of natural gut only to cut them out after a few days. Tennis Warehouse, which is I fully and have stated many times, a fantastic retailer, is a carrier of these strings. They do not post the stringing technique. They do not post the recommended hybrids. They post only that they are for sale. That's it. If they do that, then it begs the question: are the strings not meant for sale for the general public, or only those who know of a DIFFERENT retailer's website to get the specific information needed to get the most out of the product?

I was completely fair in my L-Tec review. I have L-Tec in my frame right now. It's not for me. It's not terrible, it's just not for me. No spreadsheet can tell me how my physiology will respond to a certain string setup. I just have to try it. I tried one of the recommended hybrids the first time around. Didn't think it was special. So, I said that it was nice, but nothing out of the ordinary. It was only when the concept of value, which you do not seem to understand, came into the picture that people were in an uproar. There are juniors on here, college students, college grads, full-on adults and all the way through retirees on this forum. I would wager the first three groups don't have the time and money to try 171 different string setups (assuming you only choose to do the mains and crosses one way, but if I do choose to include switching, you can almost double that number) when each stringbed costs $20. So you can talk all day long about how void my opinion is, but don't begin to suggest that what I'm saying is negative propaganda simply because unlike yourself, I cannot afford to keep trying $20 stringbeds when TW doesn't even post any recommended setups themselves.

Oh, and in case you're wondering, 171 combinations wasn't a number I typed out of frustration. That is a true figure, and would be higher if this were GG. I only used what TW has as inventory.

And that's that. Great post, PV.

So many combinations, so over-priced, so little benefit. Most people would have better luck finding a hybrid (or full bed) among what's already out there. There are so many questions flying around here everyday, but the fact is this is a small segment of the tennis playing world; most people never ask questions and have no idea what they're doing, so it's hard enough.
 

pvaudio

Legend
I do honestly want to say this though: TW, I mean no ill intent whatsoever. Your customer service has always been top notch, included me in numerous playtests, etc. So for that, I am grateful. I am not attacking TW in any way shape or form. I'm not even attacking L-Tec. Why? Because you don't post their hyperbolic claims on your website. The only way that us string nerds know about them is because of the "other" retailer. So I just want to make it plain: I'm not taking any frustration out on you. It's rooted in the fact that the product is designed to sell itself, but for the layperson, they're just too expensive to sell without legitimate results and playtester feedback. It's why I still do strongly advocate a public playtest so that we can get some real world experience. Perhaps their most recommended hybrid, or one of the pre-packaged hybrids you sell at the top of the page. That, honestly, would I think put their performance into perspective once and for all. If they do perform as expected, then boom, you've got a new flagship line. I see only two issues: the issue of selection, and the fact that it would be extraordinarily expensive. I will state here and now that if you do decide to do a playtest, I wish to not be chosen as a playtester. I've already tried two hybrids and whether they're "wrong" or not is irrelevant. I'm already too biased. Nonetheless, I'm just addressing the assertions that my opinions are void because I did not follow some set recommendations which are not even provided on the product page.
 

kiteboard

Banned
Telling them they are not scientific is not ill intent? Maybe so, but even if you are right and not wrong, and if you are right, and they were not in their testing, that's not ill intended, just truthful? The truth can be ill intended, and now, torres has to be able to prove that I am what he says I am, or pay for his "free speech." While it is true, that stiffness scales don't always represent felt on court stiffness, pointing out that it's not right to say, or write about, without doing any of that work, yourself, is just down right presumptuous. I would not appreciate it, if I was the one in the lab testing for tw, to have my work denigrated, even if you were right, that's not the point is it? Denigration of a service is the point. A service I am sure they pay for, and all who buy from them in part. Whether or not you used the rec. hybrid is not the point. The point is, you down graded them without doing so, based on hybrids I've never seen recommended by ltec. It will come out, that ltec will replace lux alu with juniors first, and then as they age, pros. Rsi will show their tests of ltec as top strings also, as soon as Greg Raven tests them with his 33 guys, at 23.2 hrs. each. I am not paid by ltec, not by anyone to defend them either, just don't like to see a great product slandered by such posters who don't even have the decency to try the product as recommended, or at all. And if I were objective out there, take that fact into account for yourself, and buy some from tw yourself and judge for yourself, and not go by slander.

I might also add, that I've tried the jet methods, the mini jet, and posted them here for pv. I am not a low tension guy, and in my opinion, as I use a heavy frame, at a larger wt., and hit very hard, that lower tension, esp. as I was never brought up with it, is not the right tension for any string. Some of those methods work, such as perimeter tension increasing, to make their strings hold tension longer and feel better for rec. hitters who can't afford to string every day/hr. Those methods are: increase the last two mains by 8lbs on each side, ping out the center 8 (18 x 20), and 6 (16 x 19) so that after adjusting them with your finger by pressing down, they have similar sonic tension/ping noise, as the shorter strings are, the higher pitch they will put out. Also, start the first three crosses at higher tension top down by several lbs ( I do 8lbs) and then as well on the last three at bottom, so that the center strings are surrounded by a tighter perimeter than normal string jobs. Simple, yet effective for tension main. if done as described. I have also found, that if you vary tension on every other cross by 2lbs going down, say from 60-58-60-58, that will also combat tension loss extremely well for those who have never tried it.

The real purpose for any of us posting is to help each other, not hurt our enthusiasm for the game, so we will buy more things from tw, not less things! Right? So let's stop all the personal bs now. If not, it will only hurt sales, and our own performance on court, not help them.
 
Last edited:

mad dog1

G.O.A.T.
Telling them they are not scientific is not ill intent? Maybe so, but even if you are right and not wrong, and if you are right, and they were not in their testing, that's not ill intended, just truthful? The truth can be ill intended, and now, torres has to be able to prove that I am what he says I am, or pay for his "free speech." While it is true, that stiffness scales don't always represent felt on court stiffness, pointing out that it's not right to say, or write about, without doing any of that work, yourself, is just down right presumptuous. I would not appreciate it, if I was the one in the lab testing for tw, to have my work denigrated, even if you were right, that's not the point is it? Denigration of a service is the point. A service I am sure they pay for, and all who buy from them in part. Whether or not you used the rec. hybrid is not the point. The point is, you down graded them without doing so, based on hybrids I've never seen recommended by ltec. It will come out, that ltec will replace lux alu with juniors first, and then as they age, pros. Rsi will show their tests of ltec as top strings also, as soon as Greg Raven tests them with his 33 guys, at 23.2 hrs. each. I am paid by ltec, not by anyone to defend them either, just don't like to see a great product slandered by such posters who don't even have the decency to try the product as recommended, or at all. And if I were objective out there, take that fact into account for yourself, and buy some from tw yourself and judge for yourself, and not go by slander.

somehow i don't get the sense that you're on ltec's payroll. did you mean to type, you are NOT paid by ltec?
 

pvaudio

Legend
Telling them they are not scientific is not ill intent? Maybe so, but even if you are right and not wrong, and if you are right, and they were not in their testing, that's not ill intended, just truthful? The truth can be ill intended, and now, torres has to be able to prove that I am what he says I am, or pay for his "free speech." While it is true, that stiffness scales don't always represent felt on court stiffness, pointing out that it's not right to say, or write about, without doing any of that work, yourself, is just down right presumptuous. I would not appreciate it, if I was the one in the lab testing for tw, to have my work denigrated, even if you were right, that's not the point is it? Denigration of a service is the point. A service I am sure they pay for, and all who buy from them in part. Whether or not you used the rec. hybrid is not the point. The point is, you down graded them without doing so, based on hybrids I've never seen recommended by ltec. It will come out, that ltec will replace lux alu with juniors first, and then as they age, pros. Rsi will show their tests of ltec as top strings also, as soon as Greg Raven tests them with his 33 guys, at 23.2 hrs. each. I am paid by ltec, not by anyone to defend them either, just don't like to see a great product slandered by such posters who don't even have the decency to try the product as recommended, or at all. And if I were objective out there, take that fact into account for yourself, and buy some from tw yourself and judge for yourself, and not go by slander.

I might also add, that I've tried the jet methods, the mini jet, and posted them here for pv. I am not a low tension guy, and in my opinion, as I use a heavy frame, at a larger wt., and hit very hard, that lower tension, esp. as I was never brought up with it, is not the right tension for any string. Some of those methods work, such as perimeter tension increasing, to make their strings hold tension longer and feel better for rec. hitters who can't afford to string every day/hr. Those methods are: increase the last two mains by 8lbs on each side, ping out the center 8 (18 x 20), and 6 (16 x 19) so that after adjusting them with your finger by pressing down, they have similar sonic tension/ping noise, as the shorter strings are, the higher pitch they will put out. Also, start the first three crosses at higher tension top down by several lbs ( I do 8lbs) and then as well on the last three at bottom, so that the center strings are surrounded by a tighter perimeter than normal string jobs. Simple, yet effective for tension main. if done as described. I have also found, that if you vary tension on every other cross by 2lbs going down, say from 60-58-60-58, that will also combat tension loss extremely well for those who have never tried it.

The real purpose for any of us posting is to help each other, not hurt our enthusiasm for the game, so we will buy more things from tw, not less things! Right? So let's stop all the personal bs now. If not, it will only hurt sales, and our own performance on court, not help them.
Just wow. Saying that stiffness is not the same as control and softness is not the same as power is hardly ill-intent. You're just reaching now.

And yes, I'm sure that Luxilon is going to be ousted by L-Tec.
 

arche3

Banned
Just wow. Saying that stiffness is not the same as control and softness is not the same as power is hardly ill-intent. You're just reaching now.

And yes, I'm sure that Luxilon is going to be ousted by L-Tec.

Your not remotely the same as Torres. Oops... tournes in honor of his string love of bhbr.
Your normal. Tournes is nuts. Lol.

Groupie3 going to bed now. Long day at work.
 
Top