Avoid tension loss never tie a main

[Irvin]

Sorry for the othere threads I posted. I could not get the pictures large enough to so. I have posted all the pics on shutterfly now and not putting them in the post so there is only one post.

I was asked in another thread to explain a method I believe will reduce tension loss when tying off. I think if you tie off the crosses you will have less tension loss than if you tie off the mains. To help explain this method I used a Gamma IPEX 7.0 - 16x18 Mains skip 7 & 9 head and throat to explain this. When stringing to avoid tension loss I would use an ATW pattern to reduce the knots.

In the first two pictures I ran the mains as usual and marked the string with a blue Sharpie to show how much the string draws back when the clamps are released. The mark moved a bit more than the width of the string (17 - 1.22 mm.) I would imagine the sting would move a bit more than that after tensioning the cross strings as this would pull on the mains too.

Go to this URL to view the first two pictures http://share.shutterfly.com/share/r...smzlu0bMnFA&startIndex=0&fid=b7bc7aadeb4e5e1b

Now I removed those strings and started over again. This time I am going to string the racket so that I can always tie off on a cross string and use an ATW pattern to reduce the knots from 4 to 2. Normally when I do an ATW pattern I tie off the short side mains at the top and I tie off a main string. But this time I wanted to tie off on a cross and not a main. I used a starting clamp to hold the string and wanted it out of the way so I ran the top cross and clamp it with my starting clamp. The next picture shows all the strings ran in except the bottom cross, two outside mains and one of the top crosses. I just pick a cross to skip depending on the pattern so I do block holes and make it difficult to get in.

Now I ran the main on the left side of the racket to the top, the third cross to the right, the last main down the racket, and finally the last cross to the left of the racket to complete the stringing.

Now it is time to tie off the top cross. Remember this string has been strung for a while and I will tension it again to get the clamp off. Then I tie the cross, mark the string, and release the clamp to see the difference in tension loss. It may be hard to see at the different angles but it only moved slightly. After tying the bottom cross I took the racket out of the stringer and jumped on it with both feet x200 times then banged it on the end of a bat x1000 time to simulate play. It is raining here today. The next three pictures show the top cross when marked, when the clamp is released, and after simulated use.

Because of the angle it is hard to see but the mark moved less than the bottom cross did. I would guess about half the width of the string and I am not sure why. For each of the three knots (one main and two crosses) I wanted to keep out as many variables as I could so I pulled tension with the tension head at 48 pounds. The racket was strung at 57 pounds.

Now for the bottom cross. Same sequence as the top cross except the picture when I released the clamp does not show the drawback well. The camera was out of focus. But the drawback initially was about the same as the top cross very slight. After jumping and banging on the racket the bottom cross moved more. It moved about the width of the string from when the string was marked. That would be 1.22 mm give or take less than my eye can detect.

I hope I have not been too wordy and have explained this well. Sorry for all the threads.

Irvin

 

[jim e]

The slack or loss of tension is from the string between the machine clamp and the knot.It does not matter if the tie off is a cross or main the small amount of string that is not tensioned and knot take up should be the same. The friction of the cross string across the mains is slight that it will even out any difference.
BTW your picture #2 and #5 the slack mark looks about the same on your picture.You are talking of very small discrepancy here, and how well a knot gets cinched up compared to another can allow for a small variance as well.
This small amount on an end string makes no difference anyways, so I just up the tie off tensions just like a # of tour stringers do,(Richard Parnell, and Tim Strawn, 2 well known Slam stringers for example) and customers are happy.

 

[Irvin]

You are correct about pictures #2 and #5 Jim, but if you look at pictures #1 and #4 notice the mark on the mains was placed closer to the grommet. When I was initially taking the pictures I though maybe since the grommet and mark were nearly the same color I would make the mark on the crosses at a different point. Trust me the mark on the mains did move farther.

Irvin

 

[jim e]

Irvin: The tension loss occurs from the point after the machine clamp, as that is the non tensioned part of the string. It is there be it a cross or main. The slack taken up will still amount to the same, with variance of string length where knot grommet can be and variance of how well a knot is cinched as each knot can vary ever so slightly depending how well you cinch it up.Some racquets the knot tie off is a long distance from the end tie off string.In otherwords there are a # of variables that create the tie off loss, and there is a loss on all tie offs. That is why a # of stringers up theirs.The end mains are noticed more for this.

It is true that most customers will tug on that end main, and will notice if it is not as tight, but most of that is occured because of the offset weave of the adjacent string,not so much from tension loss, so upping the tension keeps that string straighter, and customer happier when they jerk that string.Believe me most will pull on that end main, it may be after they take it home, and they expect it not to move.

 

[Irvin]

Jim you still do not have me convinced. I guess we will have to agree to disagree, or at least until I see a cross string tie off and draws back as much as a main does.

Irvin

 

[Rabbit]

No, Jim is right. It is one of those OCD things for me when stringing, I always like to check the short side last main against the long side, but it's undeniable. You have a length of string that is not tensioned between the clamp and whatever hole you tie off in. Unless you can pull the string equal to tension in the frame, there will be some loss there no matter how you string the frame.

There are ways to compensate, up the tension on your last pull or string a couple of crosses with the short side string, which is what I do and up the tension on the last cross before tying it off.

 

[jim e]

Jim you still do not have me convinced. I guess we will have to agree to disagree, or at least until I see a cross string tie off and draws back as much as a main does.

Irvin

Thats Okay Irvin, its whats this site is all about, as we each have our own thoughts. It's nice we can all share stringing and the great sport that tennis is, I'm sure you agree on that. Take care.

 

[Irvin]

No, Jim is right. It is one of those OCD things for me when stringing, I always like to check the short side last main against the long side, but it's undeniable. You have a length of string that is not tensioned between the clamp and whatever hole you tie off in. Unless you can pull the string equal to tension in the frame, there will be some loss there no matter how you string the frame.

There are ways to compensate, up the tension on your last pull or string a couple of crosses with the short side string, which is what I do and up the tension on the last cross before tying it off.

You and Jim are absolutely 100% correct. I too grab those two outside mains and test them. But I am not sure you are aware the last short side main and the last long side main are not the two outside mains. Hummm???

Remember the last four strings I ran were the Left outside main, the third cross, the right outside main, and the bottom cross. I put my Stringmeter Mark VI on the two outside mains are they are identical in tension.

What Jim and I disagree on is the tie off tension loss on a main as compared to a cross. And I might add what he says makes perfect sense to me. The problem is what I see and what makes sense are not the same. When I tie a knot on a cross it does not move and I see noticeable movement when I tie off a main.

Irvin

 

[jim e]

The problem is what I see and what makes sense are not the same. Irvin

That doesn't make sense!

 

[Irvin]

I think I have a partial answer. As Jim said the length of the string between the clamp and the knot should determine how much drawback there will be. I have been looking at the racket and here is what I see.

When I ran the main the distance between the clamp and the grommet was about the same on the top cross and the last main. The last main was in hole 9 while the tie off was in hole 6 (2" difference.) The top cross was in hole 7 while the tie off was in hole 5 (1" difference.) That one inch difference of string that was not tensioned could have made the difference this time.

But then there is the difference between the draw back in the top and bottom cross. The distance on the top cross was greater than the distance on the bottom but yet it drew back less. I am still thinking.

Irvin

 

[Rabbit]

^I understand and you're correct. I've been told by a world class stringer and a not world class stringer that it is always preferrable to tie off on a cross. But, some frames, like the AG100, aren't really set up for that. I find that the difference between tying off on a cross and not is not worth the aggravation

I just up the tension a little on the second cross and then do a good job cinching up the knot.

 

[Bud]

People get WAY too A-retentive with certain aspects of racquet stringing. There are countless small errors that occur from every stringing session. It will always be an imperfect science.

The most important aspect of stringing is consistency.

If your stringing is what others would call consistently poor... but your customers are happy... that is all that matters.

 

[Irvin]

^I understand and you're correct. I've been told by a world class stringer and a not world class stringer that it is always preferrable to tie off on a cross. But, some frames, like the AG100, aren't really set up for that. I find that the difference between tying off on a cross and not is not worth the aggravation

I just up the tension a little on the second cross and then do a good job cinching up the knot.

Funny you should say that because the AG100 (Dunlop Aeorgel 100?) is just the type of racket that would benefit from not tying off a main string. You agreed yourself that the length of string between the knot and the clamp is what determines the drawback on a knot. If you took your short side and ran your first cross with the end of it, the clamp can put placed closer to the frame, and the grommet is closer to the knot than the clamp and grommet hole would be on a main string. So you would have less drawback.

Now let's assume you are using floating clamps. If you clamp your last main and release the tension the clamp will twist more on the main string because that last over tensioned main will draw back on that clamp even more and there is nothing but the next to the last main to keep it from twisting. Your clamp will be farther from the grommet hole you have to put the last main in and that grommet hole if farther from the knot. More length (between the clamp and the knot) means more drawback.

If you using the floating clamps, run your first cross with the short side but do not pull tension yet. Then run your second cross with the long side and pull tension. Now you can move the flying clamp on the long side to clamp the second cross on the outside of the racket (a starting clamp would be better.) Now tension the first cross and use the flying clamp to clamp the first and second cross. There is less twisting of the flying clamp because two crosses and the mains are holding the clamp, less distance between the clamp and the frame, and the grommet hole the first cross goes into is closer to the knot. Less twisting combined with less string between the knot and the clamp means you will have less drawback.

If you are not using flying clamps the process is easier.

Irvin

 

[Irvin]

Let's take another example. If you want to string a Prince racket with the large ports on the side and you use your short side to string the first cross you have a problem. Your long side now (because it starts on the second cross) will not be positioned correctly to string the racket. So the long side of the string must be on the short side of the racket.

Remember you will also need more string on the short side to do this method of stringing.

Irvin

 

[Rabbit]

Well now hang on. Like I said, if it's doable I always elect to tie off on a cross. That was the case with all my Volkls, I never tied off on a main.

However...the Dunlop isn't geared that way and I'd just as soon not damage the grommets/racket or shear a string trying to widen a grommet on a cross.

All this on top of the fact that I don't think it means that much to move it. Remember, I'm not doing one cross, rather the first two from the short side. I always do this which makes the long side's first cross the 3rd one.

 

[Rabbit]

The other consideration is a hybrid or two piece which pretty much means you have to tie off on a main at some point.

I really just don't think it's that big a deal.

 

[todot62]

People get WAY too A-retentive with certain aspects of racquet stringing. There are countless small errors that occur from every stringing session. It will always be an imperfect science.

The most important aspect of stringing is consistency.

If your stringing is what others would call consistently poor... but your customers are happy... that is all that matters.

+1---Bud's right. This is a fun discussion to have but consistency is the important part.

 

[Irvin]

Well now hang on. Like I said, if it's doable I always elect to tie off on a cross. That was the case with all my Volkls, I never tied off on a main.

However...the Dunlop isn't geared that way and I'd just as soon not damage the grommets/racket or shear a string trying to widen a grommet on a cross.

All this on top of the fact that I don't think it means that much to move it. Remember, I'm not doing one cross, rather the first two from the short side. I always do this which makes the long side's first cross the 3rd one.

Well now hang on. I am not suggesting you tie off in a grommet hole that is not meant for a tie off. I am saying you should tie off a cross string in that tie off hole instead of a main string.

Irvin

 

[Irvin]

+1---Bud's right. This is a fun discussion to have but consistency is the important part.

True, and the less tension loss you have when tying off the more consistent your string will be.

Irvin

 

[Irvin]

The other consideration is a hybrid or two piece which pretty much means you have to tie off on a main at some point.

I really just don't think it's that big a deal.

That is true the tie off hole could be on a main or a cross it makes no difference. You are going to have a tail left over sticking out of the racket when you are ready to tie off. I think if that tail comes from a cross string it is going to have less tension loss than if it comes from a main.

And if you are doing a hybrid all this probably is a mute point depending on the racket or string you are using. If you have to use 22' from a coil of string to do the mains you have to have some use for the other 18'. Or maybe you use a half set of gut and 20' wont fit.

This whole issues is because of the question, "How do you reduce tension loss on the tie off?" My answer was use a one piece when you can, and tie off a cross string when you can. And now everyone one is picking on my telling me I am all wet. Boo-Hoo!!! lol

Irvin

 

[Irvin]

Try this little experiment for yourself. The next time you string a racket one piece do it your normal way. You will tie off a main string on the short side and a cross on the long side. Before you remove the clamps put a small mark next to the grommet on each string and look at the difference in the drawback. Try to give me a fair and honest effort and I will beat you every time.

Irvin

 

[jim e]

now everyone one is picking on my telling me I am all wet. Boo-Hoo!!! lol

Irvin

No one is picking on you. Just telling you that what you say makes no sense at all!

 

[Rabbit]

^
what he said

except.....it doesn't really matter...

 

[topanlego]

True, and the less tension loss you have when tying off the more consistent your string will be.

Irvin

Interesting view on consistency but I have to disagree. Less tension loss means you have the less tension loss. Not more consistent.

Consistency is all about being able to repeat what you do every time. Even if you always string wrongly, you are still consistent, just consistently wrong.

If your tie-offs are always loose by the same amount, then you are consistent. If you're stringing tension is always off by 2lbs, then you are consistent.

No one is picking on you. Just telling you that what you say makes no sense at all!

Well, you have to give him credit that he being consistent in his view since he is talking about consistency.

 

[Steve Huff]

Irvin, I will tell you that Jim and Rabbit are correct, but your experiment is not in vain. I think it is preferable to tie off a cross also, and I haven't met a racket yet where you can't (even the O3's). If you have the holes to tie of the mains using a 2-piece, you ALWAYS have a hole to tie off the cross using a 1-piece. Approximately half the rackets I string, I use a hybrid, so the ATW pattern doesn't come in to play, but of the other 4-500 rackets I string each year, I use an ATW pattern on the majority of them. I think you are correct in assuming that having 2 knots instead of 4 would reduce the overall tension loss (though it can easily be made up by adding tension to the tie-off string). The ATW pattern I use always has the top cross as a tie off and the bottom (or 2nd from bottom) cross as a tie off. I hate (and won't) tie off that 2nd to last main on an ATW pattern. It's not because I believe there's any more or less tension loss on the mains, but I believe it could lead to an inconsistency from side-to-side tension. So, keep on experimenting, but for now, just know that tension loss comes from that portion of the string that is clamped and past the clamp that is not being tensioned. Some people try to make up that tension by pulling tension on the knot. That's not a good practice either because it can pinch the anchor string.

 

[Irvin]

Interesting view on consistency but I have to disagree. Less tension loss means you have the less tension loss. Not more consistent.

Consistency is all about being able to repeat what you do every time. Even if you always string wrongly, you are still consistent, just consistently wrong.

If your tie-offs are always loose by the same amount, then you are consistent. If you're stringing tension is always off by 2lbs, then you are consistent.



Well, you have to give him credit that he being consistent in his view since he is talking about consistency.

And you think if there is more tension loss in the outside side the tension is consistent? Sure it is.

Irvin

 

[Irvin]

Irvin, I will tell you that Jim and Rabbit are correct, but your experiment is not in vain. I think it is preferable to tie off a cross also, and I haven't met a racket yet where you can't (even the O3's). If you have the holes to tie of the mains using a 2-piece, you ALWAYS have a hole to tie off the cross using a 1-piece. Approximately half the rackets I string, I use a hybrid, so the ATW pattern doesn't come in to play, but of the other 4-500 rackets I string each year, I use an ATW pattern on the majority of them. I think you are correct in assuming that having 2 knots instead of 4 would reduce the overall tension loss (though it can easily be made up by adding tension to the tie-off string). The ATW pattern I use always has the top cross as a tie off and the bottom (or 2nd from bottom) cross as a tie off. I hate (and won't) tie off that 2nd to last main on an ATW pattern. It's not because I believe there's any more or less tension loss on the mains, but I believe it could lead to an inconsistency from side-to-side tension. So, keep on experimenting, but for now, just know that tension loss comes from that portion of the string that is clamped and past the clamp that is not being tensioned. Some people try to make up that tension by pulling tension on the knot. That's not a good practice either because it can pinch the anchor string.

I completely agree with you. I am not saying Jim and Rabbit are incorrect. All I am saying is that it is best to tie off on a cross. If you want to up the tension fine I have no problem with that. If you want a defined pattern that will work on most rackets use UKRSA / Liam's ATW pattern. Using that pattern you never tie off a main.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIA2AKB3AJw

But by topangelo's standards even if the strings are consistently inconsistent they are consistent. Did I get that right topangelo? lol

Irvin

 

[topanlego]

And you think if there is more tension loss in the outside side the tension is consistent? Sure it is.

Irvin

Consistent across the string bed, no. But it is consistent if you do it every time, job to job.

So, if there is more tension loss on the outside side every time you string, then consistently more tension loss on the outside side every time. If you do a bad string job every time, then you are consistently bad. If you are wrong all the time, you are consistently wrong.

You get what I'm saying?

I guess what some of us are trying to say is that, in the larger picture of stringing, it doesn't matter because most people won't notice or care as long as every time you string their racquet if feels the way they expect.

 

[topanlego]

I completely agree with you. I am not saying Jim and Rabbit are incorrect. All I am saying is that it is best to tie off on a cross. If you want to up the tension fine I have no problem with that. If you want a defined pattern that will work on most rackets use UKRSA / Liam's ATW pattern. Using that pattern you never tie off a main.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XIA2AKB3AJw

But by topangelo's standards even if the strings are consistently inconsistent they are consistent. Did I get that right topangelo? lol

Irvin

YES. You got it! Consistently inconsistent is being consistent. That's why it doesn't matter.

 

[jim e]

YES. You got it! Consistently inconsistent is being consistent. That's why it doesn't matter.

That can depend if the inconsistancy is consistant as well, as if you were consistantly inconsistant, and that inconsistancy varies, then that is not consistant!

 

[Rabbit]

Irvin, I will tell you that Jim and Rabbit are correct, but your experiment is not in vain. I think it is preferable to tie off a cross also, and I haven't met a racket yet where you can't (even the O3's). If you have the holes to tie of the mains using a 2-piece, you ALWAYS have a hole to tie off the cross using a 1-piece. Approximately half the rackets I string, I use a hybrid, so the ATW pattern doesn't come in to play, but of the other 4-500 rackets I string each year, I use an ATW pattern on the majority of them. I think you are correct in assuming that having 2 knots instead of 4 would reduce the overall tension loss (though it can easily be made up by adding tension to the tie-off string). The ATW pattern I use always has the top cross as a tie off and the bottom (or 2nd from bottom) cross as a tie off. I hate (and won't) tie off that 2nd to last main on an ATW pattern. It's not because I believe there's any more or less tension loss on the mains, but I believe it could lead to an inconsistency from side-to-side tension. So, keep on experimenting, but for now, just know that tension loss comes from that portion of the string that is clamped and past the clamp that is not being tensioned. Some people try to make up that tension by pulling tension on the knot. That's not a good practice either because it can pinch the anchor string.

Steve, do me a big favor. When next you run across an AG100 to string, please tell me which cross at the head is suitable to tie off in. I just plain don't see it.... HELP!

As I indicated, I'd prefer to tie off in a cross, but the AG100 up top just doesn't appear to have a grommet suitable.

 

[Irvin]

Steve, do me a big favor. When next you run across an AG100 to string, please tell me which cross at the head is suitable to tie off in. I just plain don't see it.... HELP!

As I indicated, I'd prefer to tie off in a cross, but the AG100 up top just doesn't appear to have a grommet suitable.

Rabbit you are right, you don't see it. The top tie off hole for an AG100 is a main string hole. What is normally done is to tie off the last main string's tail in that hole. I am suggesting you tie off the cross string's tail in that same hole. I am not sure which hole it is, but let's assume it is 6H. So normally on the short side you tie the last main's tail in hole 6H on the left side of the racket. I am suggesting you run the first cross with the short side and tie off that first cross's tail in hole 6H on the right side of the racket.

Irvin

 

[Irvin]

Rabbit look at picture #4 in again

http://share.shutterfly.com/share/received/welcome.sfly?fid=8b5f92776a56cb45&sid=1AYsmzlu0bMnFA

The tie off hole is 5H and if you notice that tie off hole has a main string in it. But the clamp is on the cross string I tied off.

If I wanted to I could have got the clamp closer to the frame than I did but I wanted to leave room for pictures. Shortening the distance between the knot and the clamp reduces the drawback. Now look at pictue #1 the last main was tied off in hole 6T. Notice the distance between the knot and the clamp. That un-tensioned string between the clamp and the knot is what causes the drawback.

Irvin

 

[Rabbit]

Dude...read my posts. I already string the short side mains + the first two crosses....on the long side, the first cross strung is the 3rd cross.

This is how I string everything!

 

[Irvin]

Dude...read my posts. I already string the short side mains + the first two crosses....on the long side, the first cross strung is the 3rd cross.

This is how I string everything!

Fine. BTW read Sam Huff's last post here about what crosses he ties off. I happen agree with him.

Irvin

 

[Irvin]

Dude...read my posts. I already string the short side mains + the first two crosses....on the long side, the first cross strung is the 3rd cross.

This is how I string everything!

BTW Rabbit if you run the second cross then the top cross with the short side you are doing just as I suggested all the time. If you run the top cross first and then the second cross you are making the distance from the clamp to knot longer (I think.)

Irvin

 

[Rabbit]

Yes, Irvin, but if you do that you are also stringing "bottom up" which ain't good on a frame. I realize that this is only two crosses, but still I would rather string it top down and then pull 5 pounds extra on the second cross to compensate for the tension loss. Even so, crosses have enough tension through the weave alone to reduce tension loss enough that this really isn't an issue.

 

[Irvin]

... crosses have enough tension through the weave alone to reduce tension loss enough that this really isn't an issue.

Thread = Avoid tension loss never tie a main

If you agree, and this really isn't an issue, why do you keep coming back? Let it die.

Irvin

 

[Rabbit]

I was going to ask you the same question...

 

[Irvin]

I am staying around because I think it does make a difference.

Irvin

 

[Beacon Hill]

I avoid the tension loss on the last string by tensioning the string again once I pull it back through the tie off grommet. The string has to go on the outside of the frame to be tensioned. Then I stick an awl in to avoid drawback, release the string and tie the knot. It works well.