travlerajm

Talk Tennis Guru
Thats right. Before they are strung its standart 27. He said, and i wrote that, that after the racket is strung, it became not a standart one
The images available online appear to indicate that the handle was modified by shortening it roughly 7mm. Could it be that the stringer noticed the big difference in length and assumed it was from the hoop deformation, but didn’t notice that it had actually started out shorter?
 

am1899

Legend
Far more believable than info from personal sttinger?))))

Unless he or you has images like the one you posted below, of the supposed old “shorty” racquet…

pnIffh6aj

…then yes, I would be more inclined to believe vsbabolat and dr325i…
 

Kalugin

Rookie
Thank you that’s the point I’ve been making for the last 3 years. travlerajm keeps insisting his racquets are shorter. He has made wild claims that the racquet is 26 inches. Which is wrong.Its 26 smth
Its 26smth after its strung, cause it became shorter and wider
 

am1899

Legend
The images available online appear to indicate that the handle was modified by shortening it roughly 7mm. Could it be that the stringer noticed the big difference in length and assumed it was from the hoop deformation, but didn’t notice that it had actually started out shorter?

For me, utilizing online images for this purpose seems to be dubious at best - to be able to make any reliable conclusions.
 

travlerajm

Talk Tennis Guru
Unless he or you has images like the one you posted below, of the supposed old “shorty” racquet…



…then yes, I would be more inclined to believe vsbabolat and dr325i…
Those pics are are of his 2022 racquet, which measures 27.0” in all online images. The 2021 frame measures 26.7”.
 

travlerajm

Talk Tennis Guru
For me, utilizing online images for this purpose seems to be dubious at best - to be able to make any reliable conclusions.
A single image can have significant error. But averaging proportions of many images and comparing to many images of a control frame of known confirmed length is very accurate.

Furthermore, if the hoop was also squashed as reported, then the measurements from proportion method would tend to overestimate the length, because the handle would be longer relative to the hoop.
 

Kalugin

Rookie
Unless he or you has images like the one you posted below, of the supposed old “shorty” racquet…



…then yes, I would be more inclined to believe vsbabolat and dr325i…
No problem, believe anyone you want. Before 2022 Karatsevs rackets used to be shorter after stringing procedure. From 2022 he is using standart racket length, as you see from my racket. This is Aslans racket from excibition event in St.Petersburg last year, never was restrung since
 

am1899

Legend
A single image can have significant error. But averaging proportions of many images and comparing to many images of a control frame of known confirmed length is very accurate.

Furthermore, if the hoop was also squashed as reported, then the measurements from proportion method would tend to overestimate the length, because the handle would be longer relative to the hoop.

Without going hands on with the actual racquets in question, I disagree that meaningful, precise measurements can be made. You’re entitled to your opinion to the contrary, of course.
 

travlerajm

Talk Tennis Guru
No problem, believe anyone you want. Before 2022 Karatsevs rackets used to be shorter after stringing procedure. From 2022 he is using standart racket length, as you see from my racket. This is Aslans racket from excibition event in St.Petersburg last year, never was restrung since
It seems the controversy is not quite resolved. Perhaps your friend can send you a photo of the gap between his two fingers estimating the length difference? :)
 

dr325i

G.O.A.T.
I am not claiming anything. I am just the messenger reporting measurements.
I have posted pictures of his unstrung 2020 frame (all red PJ) which did not change the length in 2021 or 2022 - they are all exactly 27” (685mm)

As for string deforming frames, all of my frames (Gravity Tour, soft hoop) are 27.1” uncut (+3.5mm). I string them 54lbs gut in the mains and 48 lbs Poly crosses. They are just under 27” strung, therefore, they compress about 5mm (1/2 cm) are fairly modest tension.

The PT57A also has a very soft hoop, and I do believe that it could be compressed even further at 60+ lbs pulls. However, I cannot claim that situation like that would shorten frames’ lifetime…

 

vsbabolat

G.O.A.T.
Yeah so what? That was before I got a refined measurement for hoop proportion from other posters and updated it.

I stand by my numbers that are still here in the thread.
So you’re wrong then and now. You were even comparing different rackets. The racquet in the middle was IG Prestige Mid. You don’t know what you’re taking about.
 

Kalugin

Rookie
I have posted pictures of his unstrung 2020 frame (all red PJ) which did not change the length in 2021 or 2022 - they are all exactly 27” (685mm)

As for string deforming frames, all of my frames (Gravity Tour, soft hoop) are 27.1” uncut (+3.5mm). I string them 54lbs gut in the mains and 48 lbs Poly crosses. They are just under 27” strung, therefore, they compress about 5mm (1/2 cm) are fairly modest tension.

The PT57A also has a very soft hoop, and I do believe that it could be compressed even further at 60+ lbs pulls. However, I cannot claim that situation like that would shorten frames’ lifetime…

Gromov also mentiod today, that he tried to warn Aslan back in 2021 that this habbit (to play with shorter and wider racket) will kill rackets faster than it should be on regular scheme. But Aslan's coach just told Gromov: Leave him, he likes deformed rackets, so okay...But, from 2022 Karatsev highly likely started to use normal rackets that we can see on a case of my racket, that i post here
 
Last edited:

travlerajm

Talk Tennis Guru
Gromov also mentiod today, that he tried to warn Aslan back in 2021 that this habbit (to play with shorter and wider racket) will kill rackets faster than it should be on regular scheme. But Aslan's coach just told Gromov: Leave him, he likes deformed rackets, so okay...But, from 2022 Karatsev highly likely started to use normal rackets that we can see on a case of my racket, that i post here
A friend of mine, who I used to hit with, is a childhood friend of Aslan’s coach, and says he is the one who will “try anything.”
 

Gerco

Professional
normal rackets
Hey Kalugin thanks for all the pics and info!! I think what you ment to say here was "normaly strung rackets", right? I believe this is what the whole topic is about. It was always the same racket, only that Aslan used to asked it strung a special way before, and now he strings it conventionally.
 

Kalugin

Rookie
Hey Kalugin thanks for all the pics and info!! I think what you ment to say here was "normaly strung rackets", right? I believe this is what the whole topic is about. It was always the same racket, only that Aslan used to asked it strung a special way before, and now he strings it conventionally.
100%!!! Thank you very much for feedbackl
 

Kalugin

Rookie
pn3Ir26Nj

Guys! Can anybody help me with this one? Sorry, that im posting about other racket here, but im trying to get more info on this one. I made a thread named

A. Agassi Tour (Radical Tour 630) - the most rare PT57 racket?​

More photos - there. So you are very Welcome to discuss this rare stick
 

am1899

Legend
The PT57A also has a very soft hoop, and I do believe that it could be compressed even further at 60+ lbs pulls. However, I cannot claim that situation like that would shorten frames’ lifetime…

Had a situation like that earlier this year…

A couple local players had all switched to the same frame and were all breaking them. All were stringing in the high 60’s. Eventually 3 of them made their way to me to be restrung. First thing I did was measure. Strung they were all slightly more than 1/4 inch shorter than they were when i measured them unstrung. Didn’t seem like to coincidence to me that all of these guys broke several frames. (And none of those players hit anywhere near the kind of ball a tour player does). I’ll concede this was a different brand in question (than Head), and this is all anecdotal on my part. But still. With the kind of difference in length being thrown around…I would be concerned about the integrity of any racquet.
 

bobeeto

Hall of Fame
there should be no revelation in the fact that frames compress when strung. Here are my rackets. Notice how the middle has a cleaner bumper guard, and is slightly longer? It’s because it’s had the least use and stringing!
Does that mean that I am specifically playing with shorty rackets…. No! :)
 

Airmate

Rookie
Just made swingweight measurements on Karatsev's racket - its 350 official.
Just now i've visited personal Aslan's stinger (while he is playing tournaments in Russia). And this stinger told me UNBELIEVABLE THINGS about Karatsev's racket. Today i will tell you the secret about his frame.
Thank you sir. Sounds like an average spec for ATP pros...
 
pn3Ir26Nj

Guys! Can anybody help me with this one? Sorry, that im posting about other racket here, but im trying to get more info on this one. I made a thread named

A. Agassi Tour (Radical Tour 630) - the most rare PT57 racket?​

More photos - there. So you are very Welcome to discuss this rare stick

You may get more info from below thread.

 

Kalugin

Rookie
You may get more info from below thread.

I didnt find any info on particulary this stick out there. Maybe you did?
 

ServenVolley

New User
So today i visited the most famous stinger in Russia, his name is Victor Gromov. His was named The Best stinger in Russia by Russian Tennis Federation. Was official sttinger at Kremlin Cup since the very beggining. Gromov was the man that was working with Aslan's rackets during Kremlin Cup-2021. When Karatsev gave his rackets for the first time, Gromov (as he said today) didnt believe his eyes. Aslan asked him to string his racket so the racket would change length and the width of its head! Karatsev was used to play with a racket around 1 cm wider in its head and around 1 cm shorter in its length. Gromov said that it was the first such case in his practise. Thats the story about Karatsev's-2021 racket. I hope this story will be useful and interesting for tennis fans.

If I understand you correctly, Gromov (at Karatsev's request) would mount the racquet into the stringing machine and (using the frame supports) would "stretch" the frame so it would be 1cm wider and 1cm shorter?

I don't see how that is possible: The frame supports on professional stringing machines (Wilson, Technifibre, Babolat) are unidirectional and designed to prevent the racquet from stretching/warping during stringing.
However, all the frame supports are designed to work in one direction.
The two INNER frame clamps - at the top center of the frame and at center of the bridge (12 o'clock and 6 o'clock position) - are designed to PULL.
The four OUTER frame clamps - at about 2 o'clock, 5 o'clock, 7 o'clock and 10 o'clock - are designed to PUSH.
Overtightening all the frame supports would result in making the racquet longer and narrower (the opposite of what you're claiming).


Or, are you saying that Gromov would clamp the racquet in the machine in the regular way and while the main strings are under tension would loosen the inner frame supports (very slowly) and also loosen the outer frame supports so the racquet would contract lengthwise and expand widthwise until it is 1 cm shorter and 1 cm wider?
I have never tried that but it would be possible with the mains. However, I believe that once you start with the cross strings, there's no way to stop the racquet from elongating again. The inner frame supports are designed to stop the racquet from contracting lengthwise but can't stop the racquet from expanding lengthwise. If you used steel cables in the mains (with minimal stretch) you might be able to keep the racquet from elongating lengthwise once you start on the crosses. With regular strings, the pulling force of the cross strings will contract the width of the racquet which will have an elongating effect on the length of the racquet.

Now, if you had a stringing machine with frame clamps that would be bidirectional instead of unidirectional, you might be able to force a racquet into the your desired shape (longer, shorter, wider, narrower) and then string it. I don't know if that would work though as I'm not familiar with the shape memory of graphite/kevlar/twaron etc. as the racquet wants to go back to its "natural" shape.

Also, keep in mind that the above scenarios would have an effect on the string tension: If you loosen the inner frame supports while the mains are under tension (shortening the length of the racquet and expanding the width of the racquet), the tension of the mains will increase once you start on the crosses. As the stringing machine is not designed to stop a racquet from expanding lengthwise (within reason), the increased length of the racquet will apply more force to the mains = higher tension.

Now if you had a stringing machine with two INNER frame clamps at 9 o'clock and 3 o'clock (expanding the width = making it shorter) and OUTER frame clamps at 12 o'clock and 6 o'clock (compressing the length = making it shorter = making it wider) THEN you might be able to make your racquet 1cm shorter and 1 cm wider. However, I've never seen a stringing machine with such a frame set up.


I'm aware that the OUTER frame clamps are positioned so that stringing process limits the lengthwise expansion of the racquet. In order for a racquet to keep its shape, each force needs an equal and opposite reaction force. However, for practical purposes, this is not really possible and in the real world compromises are necessary. The way stringing machines are designed the natural stringing process make a racquet longer (length) and narrower (width) by millimeters not centimeters.
 

travlerajm

Talk Tennis Guru
If I understand you correctly, Gromov (at Karatsev's request) would mount the racquet into the stringing machine and (using the frame supports) would "stretch" the frame so it would be 1cm wider and 1cm shorter?

I don't see how that is possible: The frame supports on professional stringing machines (Wilson, Technifibre, Babolat) are unidirectional and designed to prevent the racquet from stretching/warping during stringing.
However, all the frame supports are all designed to work in one direction.
The two INNER frame clamps - at the top center of the frame and at center of the bridge (12 o'clock and 6 o'clock position) - are designed to PULL.
The four OUTER frame clamps - at about 2 o'clock, 5 o'clock, 7 o'clock and 10 o'clock - are designed to PUSH.
Overtightening all the frame supports would result in making the racquet longer and narrower (the opposite of what you're claiming).


Or, are you saying that Gromov would clamp the racquet in the machine in the regular way and while the main strings are under tension would loosen the inner frame supports (very slowly) and also loosen the outer frame supports so the racquet would contract lengthwise and expand widthwise until it is 1 cm shorter and 1 cm wider?

I have never tried that but it would be possible with the mains. However, I believe that once you start with the cross strings, there's no way to stop the racquet from elongating again. The inner frame supports are designed to stop the racquet from contracting lengthwise but can't stop the racquet from expanding lengthwise. If you used steel cables in the mains (with minimal stretch) you might be able to keep the racquet from elongating lengthwise once you start on the crosses. With regular strings, the pulling force of the cross strings will contract the width of the racquet which will have an elongating effect on the length of the racquet.

Now, if you had a stringing machine with frame clamps that would be bidirectional instead of unidirectional, you might be able to force a racquet into the your desired shape (longer, shorter, wider, narrower) and then string it. I don't know if that would work though as I'm not familiar with the shape memory of graphite/kevlar/twaron etc. as the racquet wants to go back to its "natural" shape.

Also, keep in mind that the above scenarios would have an effect on the string tension: If you loosen the inner frame supports while the mains are under tension (shortening the length of the racquet and contracting the width of the racquet), that tension of the mains will increase once you start on the crosses. As the stringing machine is not designed to stop a racquet from expanding lengthwise, the increased length of the racquet will apply more force to the mains = higher tension.

Now if you had a stringing machine with two INNER frame clamps at 9 o'clock and 3 o'clock (expanding the width = making it shorter) and OUTER frame clamps at 12 o'clock and 6 o'clock (compressing the length = making it shorter = making it wider) THEN you might be able to make your racquet 1cm shorter and 1 cm wider. However, I've never seen a stringing machine with such a frame set up.


I'm aware that the OUTER frame clamps are positioned so that stringing process limits the lengthwise expansion of the racquet. In order for a racquet to keep its shape, each force needs an equal and opposite reaction force. However, for practical purposes, this is not really possible and in the real world compromises are necessary. The way stringing machines are designed the natural stringing process make a racquet longer (length) and narrower (width) by millimeters not centimeters.
I don’t know what the stringing procedure was, but the online photo record does confirm @Kalugin ‘s report by showing Karatsev wielding racquets with more rounded hoop shape at both ‘21 Moscow and ‘21 US Open later in the year.

When I have time I will put together some side-by-side images to confirm the different shape and how much difference there is.

However, this does not explain why the A021 frame appears to have 1/4” shorter handle, but normal oval hoop shape.
 

Kalugin

Rookie
If I understand you correctly, Gromov (at Karatsev's request) would mount the racquet into the stringing machine and (using the frame supports) would "stretch" the frame so it would be 1cm wider and 1cm shorter?

I don't see how that is possible: The frame supports on professional stringing machines (Wilson, Technifibre, Babolat) are unidirectional and designed to prevent the racquet from stretching/warping during stringing.
However, all the frame supports are designed to work in one direction.
The two INNER frame clamps - at the top center of the frame and at center of the bridge (12 o'clock and 6 o'clock position) - are designed to PULL.
The four OUTER frame clamps - at about 2 o'clock, 5 o'clock, 7 o'clock and 10 o'clock - are designed to PUSH.
Overtightening all the frame supports would result in making the racquet longer and narrower (the opposite of what you're claiming).


Or, are you saying that Gromov would clamp the racquet in the machine in the regular way and while the main strings are under tension would loosen the inner frame supports (very slowly) and also loosen the outer frame supports so the racquet would contract lengthwise and expand widthwise until it is 1 cm shorter and 1 cm wider?
I have never tried that but it would be possible with the mains. However, I believe that once you start with the cross strings, there's no way to stop the racquet from elongating again. The inner frame supports are designed to stop the racquet from contracting lengthwise but can't stop the racquet from expanding lengthwise. If you used steel cables in the mains (with minimal stretch) you might be able to keep the racquet from elongating lengthwise once you start on the crosses. With regular strings, the pulling force of the cross strings will contract the width of the racquet which will have an elongating effect on the length of the racquet.

Now, if you had a stringing machine with frame clamps that would be bidirectional instead of unidirectional, you might be able to force a racquet into the your desired shape (longer, shorter, wider, narrower) and then string it. I don't know if that would work though as I'm not familiar with the shape memory of graphite/kevlar/twaron etc. as the racquet wants to go back to its "natural" shape.

Also, keep in mind that the above scenarios would have an effect on the string tension: If you loosen the inner frame supports while the mains are under tension (shortening the length of the racquet and expanding the width of the racquet), the tension of the mains will increase once you start on the crosses. As the stringing machine is not designed to stop a racquet from expanding lengthwise (within reason), the increased length of the racquet will apply more force to the mains = higher tension.

Now if you had a stringing machine with two INNER frame clamps at 9 o'clock and 3 o'clock (expanding the width = making it shorter) and OUTER frame clamps at 12 o'clock and 6 o'clock (compressing the length = making it shorter = making it wider) THEN you might be able to make your racquet 1cm shorter and 1 cm wider. However, I've never seen a stringing machine with such a frame set up.


I'm aware that the OUTER frame clamps are positioned so that stringing process limits the lengthwise expansion of the racquet. In order for a racquet to keep its shape, each force needs an equal and opposite reaction force. However, for practical purposes, this is not really possible and in the real world compromises are necessary. The way stringing machines are designed the natural stringing process make a racquet longer (length) and narrower (width) by millimeters not centimeters.
I appreciate such a monumental analysis from tour side, thats more than impressive! But im not a stinger. Im a player (back during youth days), tennis collector and radio and TV host. So i do know Nothing about the procedure of how they string the racket. I care only on how i feel the racket in my hands) Actually my visit to Gromov office was connected with finding out swingweights of some rackets from my collection and SW of my own Pro Tours 630. We made measurements for Nadal's stick, then Rublev's, and then it was Karatsev's turn. It was 350. And he just said: By the way, I remember how i worked on his rackets back in 2021 when he won the Kremlin Cup. I asked him if it was something interesting with Aslan's sticks. And he said - Oh, yeah! And then all the story, that i already have posted here. Somehow, during stringing procedure he made his rackets wider and shorter. Because Aslan asked him personally to make his rackets like this! Gromov was against this procedure, was trying to tell his coach, that this is not a good thing for rackets, but coach just said: What can i do, please make them how he asked you.
I didnt say that 1 cm exactly, I wrote - around. So, maybe it was 0,7 cm, who knows. But that is a fact - Karatsev's rackets during Kremlin Cup 2021 were deformed.
Also Gromov mentioned that this was the first time during his around 50-years career, when a player asked him to make a racket wider and shorter. He added, that around 25 years ago at Kremlin Cup one ATP player asked him to lengthen his racket. But Karatsev was the first who asked to do the opposite thing
 

KungfuTennis

Semi-Pro
I absolutely believe that its hoop deformation and not a shorter frame, I held two of Dimitrov's personal rackets from the USO this year and the hoops were SUPER squashed, almost yonex shaped due to deformation (high tension gut mains + 18x18 pattern).
 

Kalugin

Rookie
I absolutely believe that its hoop deformation and not a shorter frame, I held two of Dimitrov's personal rackets from the USO this year and the hoops were SUPER squashed, almost yonex shaped due to deformation (high tension gut mains + 18x18 pattern).
We can make any guesses we like and we want, or we can take a racket that was used by Aslan and make some measurements. What i did
 
because such margins presumably make a difference at the highest levels, do some pros get their frames extended because of this squashing effect occurring with the arrangement of some layups?
 
Top