Discussion in 'Strings' started by Up&comer, Sep 23, 2011.
Exactly. Some players are string sensitive and others can't tell the difference.
I wish I have your english B , makes life more easy.
In a gut mains hybrid, co focus has more spin, more power, and less control.
More spin and less spin? Did you make a typo?
Haha yep. Sorry.
um, so what is it you were trying to say? Instead of the last 'spin'? or was it just more spin and power and that's it?
I meant less control.
When is your next string test? Did you sign up for the free Luxilon playtest?
I need to write my review on scorp mains then I have ruff code, and yes I did sign up for the Luxy test.
thank you, sir.
WeissCANNON Scorpion/Pacific Classic 53/55
Stringing- Really pretty easy. No problems with scorpion, and no friction burn with gut.
Groundstrokes- I mean, they were alright. Not quite like the control I have with B5E in the mains, but still good. Flat shots were better than the B5E, but spin was tougher to come by and there was definietly more power. I can, however, see plenty of people preferring this setup over the B5E variant.
Serves- Right on par with the aforementioned setup. There was more power and less spin, which made kicks a little tougher, but the placement was still there and the extra power made flat serves killer.
Volleys- Here is where it knocks B5E/Gut out of the water. I mean, the feel, touch, placement, pocketing, it was all there. Soft but firm (like gut strung tighter) and plenty of controlled power. It just seemed to work better.
Durability- Better than B5E, and since it's WeissCANNON, it holds tension really well.
Softness- 1 being the softest, 10 being the stiffest
Overall- 3.5, maybe 4/10
Overall, this would be a phenominal setup for an all court player. I do like the lower power of B5E, and what I gain at net isn't as important because I already have all the weapons I need up there. Maybe it would be better for doubles.
Uvijek Argen, I tried B5E + MT 16 in crosses last week. My game was completely ruined by performance of this combination. I tried to adjust during 6-7 hours but I must admit I hate this combination. To me B5E plays similar to TF BC. No control, no spin, too much power. I just can't get this buzz about B5E.
BAM1.15+MT1.3 is the best combo for me at this moment (I have nothing to do with PS company).
First time I've heard "no spin" and "too much power" associated with B5E. Was the BAM/MT hybrid strung at the same tension as the B5E/MT hybrid?
B5E plays nothing like BC.
And how can you assess whether it plays well or how it plays when you're using it as a hybrid? There's loads spin and control from B5E.
As for B5E having too much power, that's just laughable.
All the problems you're having is either because the strings don't interact well with each other, or the characteristics of the MT are coming too much to the fore, or something's gone wrong during stringing.
What did you string at?
This is why I asked if there was a tension difference. I could see those comments coming from somebody who used MT although I have not tried the 16g version.
I agree. B5e is really low powered. Not to mention BAM is a higher powered poly.
Up&Comer (or anyone else)...why would you choose a poly/gut hybrid over Gut/poly? The only reason I can think of is that gut/poly is too powerful for you? I think its generally accepted around here that gut/poly gets as much spin as full poly, correct?
re spin from pure gut versus gut/poly, I can tell you that my classic/co-focus hybrid gives me more spin than a full bed of tough gut.
Poly crosses with gut mains gives more spin than full gut.
Yes, gut mains have more spin and power, but less control. I prefer something lower powered.
Also durability. I break gut mains in about 6 hours and gut crosses in about 10.
I'm sorry, I meant "full poly"...not "full gut".
My point was, what advantages does poly/gut have over gut/poly? Seems like a nice soft syngut like N.vy would serve just as well as a cross for poly mains. Unless you are going to use the gut in the mains, it doesn't make much sense to use as a cross IMO.
I'm sorry, I wrote that wrong. Please reread my post.
That's a common misconception. With the right poly main, like a low powered, spin friendly string like b5e, the gut mains give more controlled power and spin, as well as a bigger sweetspot. Synthetic doesn't do that.
Poly mains give more control and more durability.
Gut mains and poly crosses have just as much spin as poly, but it has way more power.
I mean, I could turn this around and say why waste gut in the mains when it's just going to break soon? Why not just use synthetic?
What I'm trying to say is that a synthetic may feel enough like gut, but nothing has the playability of gut, even in the crosses.
I've just played using BAM+MT a 3 set match. Although my opponent has won (2-1), I feel like my game is back.
I use same raquets (dunlop 4d 200 16x19. I have 2 with similar grips and specs), same tensions (55/57), almost same temperature, same court, same babolat machine (the stringer did pre-stretching). I use MT 1.3 as a cross string in both cases at 57. The only difference is polys gauge. B5E is 1.24 and BAM is 1.15.
I confirm I do feel like b5e has more power, less feel, no spin, no control and no touch comparing BAM+MT. A combination of BC 1.24 + MT 1.3 played like B5E1.24+MT1.3. Although the spin was better for BC main.
With BAM+MT I can attack with precise topspin shots, I serve better and can place soft touch shots exactly where I want. My 1HBH topspin and slice are better too. My 1HBH is much more consistent.
Hmmm...never heard that before. Wouldn't happen to have a reference, would ya?
a more elastic string is said to "open" the sweetspot up a little bit. stringing lower also produces the same effect.
the idea is that you get a less harsh feedback on slightly offcenter shots either way.
i hit around the seventh cross top-down, so i'm "moving up" the sweetspot by adding some weight to the hoop, stringing the upper 6 crosses slightly lower and employing a soft cross string (currently the mcs, can't afford natty gut for 4hrs hitting time).
in certain limits you can "tweak" your set-up to fit your requirements.
I've just played using BAM+MT a 3 set match. Although my opponent has won (2-1), I feel like my game is back.
sorry I'm being dense. What is BAM and MT?
Pro supex big ace micro. Pro supex maxim touch.
Pretty much sums it up.
I understand what fgs is saying, but that's not the same as saying "gut gives you a larger sweetspot", which is what I was trying to clarify. Yes, it stands to reason you can get the sensation of a larger sweetspot by using a very elastic string, which is certainly a characteristic associated with gut. You can get the same effect with a soft multi such as MCS, albeit to a slightly lesser degree.
Not trying to be argumentative--it's just that when I read your statement about gut enlarging the sweetspot, I took it literally and thought that maybe your statement came from the USRSA or similar documentation.
The primary reason you think it's a waste to put it in the crosses is that you think all im looking for is a soft cross.
The reason I put the gut in the crosses instead of mcs or addiction is because of the playability. There's no multi that has the same playability of gut.
scientifically speaking i don't think you can enlarge the sweetspot. i understand the sweetspot as the area of maximum energy return. by altering the balance and increasing the weight you can "scientifically" move that around a little bit, closer to the upper part of the hoop or the lower part.
what you can tweak obviously is the "sensation" you get in the sense that by altering tension or employing a softer string you get a higher energy return off the same spot as compared to a tighter stringbed or a stiffer string.
Take it easy, kid. First of all, you're inserting things I never said or even suggested (...primary reason you think it's a waste...). Try not getting so defensive and just read what I said. I've played with gut, and a myriad of other strings in the many years I've been playing this game. I'm fully aware of the characteristics gut has to offer compared to other strings. I also know you can learn something every day, and I was all ears thinking that maybe you'd seen something I haven't. Happens all the time.
My take is that the statement you made about gut enlarging the sweetspot is something you either heard or read in a forum somewhere and took it as gospel - I'm guessing, mind you. That happens quite frequently as well.
fgs...I completely agree, and I was already on that page. ;-)
up&comer has really thorough knowledge and seems to be genuinely preoccupied with the issues he's writing about. this is one of the threads i regularly visit in spite of most probably not going back to natty gut anytime soon. i had my more than fair share of it in my junior years when i was going through two sets a day dreaming of making it big time on the circuit
being young, a lot younger than me and it seems also than you, he sometime seems to take it too personally. he'll understand that you did not intend to "school" him, i'm pretty sure of that, and i hope he goes on with his good job of reporting.
I never questioned his knowledge, and again, I was actually hoping he knew something I didn't. Yes, he's done a great job with this thread, and I believe I posted something to that effect earlier (several pages ago).
It's commonplace for people to see something written or hear something uttered from a would-be respected source and take that as law. U&P is certainly well respected on these boards, and deservedly so, hence others who aren't inclined to question what they read would take his statement as gospel and quite possibly pass it on to others, perpetuating the myth.
more "seasoned" players are not so prone to the marketing lingo of the producers - i've seen descriptions of strings that "enhance" the sweetspot, as well as racquets of "respectable" producers which seem to have the sweetspot including also the frame.
there are also some truly misleading "reports" from "reputable" institutions like the rsi which tells you that according to their stiffness measurements you can literally predict the behaviour of the string. there are also fellowmembers of this board who take this as gospel and you are likely to get some truly "scientific" debates over this.
in my opinion though up&comer is not really affected by this sort of information.
I think Copey makes a fair point but the "take it easy, kid" line was condescending. At least to me. Perhaps it wasn't intended in that vein, but it came off that way to me.
I'm guessing U&C is reporting what he actually felt. Whether it is scientifically defensible like RSI stiffness ratings (ha ha) is debatable.
True enough, however, there are quite a few seasoned players who know absolutely nothing or very little about strings. I play with and string for a number of them. I was one of them for years myself.
I can see how that line could be taken as condescending, especially if that person is a young adult (early 20s I mean). I have a son and quite a few nieces/nephews older than the OP, hence to me he's a kid. Still, it would have been better to leave that particular line out, so my apologies U&C if you took that as offensive.
stuff like RSI measurements, technical sizes and locations of sweetspots, etc....?
this is where my relative ignorance on this whole subject pays off. I have literally no clue about any of that. I just string it up and see if I play well with it and like the feel of it. If I'm hitting balls a foot long consistently with a new string, it's OBVIOUSLY the string and could not possibly have anything to do with my performance that day. Drop shots not clearing the net? Well there's that dang string again.
I think intuitively most of us know pretty quickly if a string setup has potential for us or not. I've put strings in my racquet and cut them out after hitting with them for 15 minutes. Was clear they weren't for me.
I love threads like this because it puts stuff on my radar that otherwise wouldn't be there. It's up to me to see how the strings interact both with my stick and my game. Fun stuff to experiment with these things.
Some people get way more technical than even the things you mention. Just go out and hit with a string like you said and then report back to the rest of us.
That's exactly what I was doing.
I rarely, if ever, look at reviews of strings or even a description.
And yes, I am still a kid.
you are a smart kid and i mean it seriously! and from your string descriptions i understand that you also know a few things about tennis - keep it going! it's fun.
from what U&C has described, sounds like he's in high school.
if so, and even if he's in college, I gotta say, he thinks and communicates at a level FAR above his peers. Shoot, far above most adults.
the dude has it going on.
School definitely comes first. I'm number 2 in my class behind a person who's taking three ap classes this semester.
I've got ap environmental, ap us history, French 3 (or trois) and chemistry, which is an awesome class.
It is clear from his writing this is a bright young man.
OK guys, let see if U&C is smart.
Like this picture said... U&C can you link between the two?
That you use the pencil to rewind the cassette?
Separate names with a comma.