Have you tried it on that racquet? It's not as open as, say, a 100" Prince racquet with the same pattern. It's worth a shot if you think the 18x20 is too dense for you, and much better than stringing a racquet in a way that it wasn't designed.
Then it's not going to make hardly any real difference stringing it that way.
Where do you see that Tiafoe skips a string somewhere inside the pattern (not one of the outermost strings)? I guarantee you he does not. There are two main rules (actually I'm second guessing that there's only two, but I can only think of two off the top of my head): 1) you have to weave the strings (no spaghetti-patterns allowed), and 2) the string pattern has to be uniform/consistent throughout, meaning you can't have significantly (manufacturers do sometimes push this a little) bigger or smaller distances between strings at different spots within the pattern.
Lower tension
Yes, you can skip outer strings. But once the pattern begins, it must be relatively uniform/consistent. So you could just string your racquet in a 6x6 pattern by just doing the central 6 central strings if you really wanted to. Or in an 18x20 you could skip every other string turning it into a 9x10 as long as you were consistent/uniform throughout, but you cannot, say, skip only the 7th and 13th crosses, because that would breakup the pattern, causing it to no longer be uniform/consistent.
Higher tension breaks string.
What do you mean by that?
Which doesn't make a good deal of sense.
That’s true
I agree a thinner string will stretch more during stringing and will retain less elasticity. You could drop the tension AND unse string savers.
The part about the 2 hitting surfaces being the same might be specifically assumed at the Blackburne double strung racquet; it has 2 sets of string beds that are at the edge of the frame rather than one in the middle of the frame.
