Has anyone tried gluing short pieces of string, the mains, where the snap back occurs, before string

[kiteboard]

stringing the crosses, ie, with super glue? So that the snap back and friction would increase and spin along with it? Would not be a spaghetti job per se, as the glue would make the strings one string inbetween the 4th-9th cross down. I'd try it with say, big ace micro mains, and gamma zo verve glued pieces: 4th-9th cross down and then string crosses after glue is dry, as an experiment for fun to see if the spin is affected much. I would say, if the glue holds, the spin would increase by about 10% or more. YOu could wrap the pieces with dental floss around the mains to hold them while drying and it would add to the extrusion. Then you could spray and glue sand on the larger surface area. I'd also like to make cc: tiger strips, with a hollow tunnel, you use to thread the main center 6, with teeth, sticking out top and bottom to that the teeth grab the ball, and you string crosses around the tiger strips like this:

 

[Daniel_K]

trying to envision what this would be...

 

[heninfan99]

try nail polish from the dollar store

 

[kiteboard]

If it works, it's not illegal, and would add a ton of spin, theory being, the hitting bed, would be triple thick, with all sorts of sharp edges, in the triple glued area, three short pieces of gamma zo verve, ie, glued around each of the six center mains. Tie them off on the ends with dental floss so it does not extrude.

 

[esgee48]

In theory, Gamma Ruff SG would do what you want to try. It has an extra thick spiral wound round wrap around the string for its entire length. It is legal for use. I am not so sure what you are proposing would be legal since it protrudes above the surface of the string bed only at certain sections on crosses. Doesn't meet the uniform surface requirement?

I think that perhaps a multi string hybrid (more than 2 strings for mains and crosses) would be legal as long as you can tie the string off. There was a thread about this on TT. Someone tried using 2 different strings for mains and 2 different strings for crosses. IIRC, the central mains and crosses were one string with the softer string relegated to the upper/lower crosses and outer mains. Tie offs would be a problem unless you can enlarge enough grommet holes.

 

[Irvin]

If it works, it's not illegal, and would add a ton of spin, theory being, the hitting bed, would be triple thick, with all sorts of sharp edges, in the triple glued area, three short pieces of gamma zo verve, ie, glued around each of the six center mains. Tie them off on the ends with dental floss so it does not extrude.

It may work but it is not legal. "The racket shall be free of any attached object, protrusion or device which makes it possible to change materially the shape of the racket, or its moment of inertia about any principal axis, or to change any physical property which may affect the performance of the racket during the playing of a point. Attached objects, protrusions and devices that are approved as Player Analysis Technology, or that are utilised to limit or prevent wear and tear or vibration or, for the frame only, to distribute weight, are permitted."

"Case 1: Is more than one set of strings allowed on the hitting surface of a racket? Decision: No. The rule mentions a pattern (not patterns) of crossed strings. (See Appendix II)"

"Case 2: Is the stringing pattern of a racket considered to be generally uniform and flat if the strings are on more than one plane?
Decision: No."

EDIT: With a string like Gamma ruff you have a center core with two wraps around it from end to end not a section where extra string is added to produce spin. Even with the wraps the string bed is generally uniform and flat. The only objects that can be added to the frame are those to prevent wear or change weight, balance, and inertia. The only thing that can be added to the string are those to prevent wear or vibration. You're adding garbage to the string bed only in specific locations and the string bed is no longer uniform or flat in those areas. The reason you're adding that garbage is solely to produce spin and the rules say anything you add to the strings must be for either wear or vibration. You're deliberately breaking the rules and have little or no respect for the game IMO.

 

[Irvin]

The ITF will never allow a device (of any sort) to be glued in the strings to enhance spin. But just in case they ever do you better apply for a patent on your 'invention' so you're the only one that can make it. If that pattern ever becomes legal and works every tennis player in the world will want it and you will become very very rich.

EDIT: BUT, IT AINT GONNA HAPPEN!!!

 

[kiteboard]

Since the glue would make the strings one string, it may be under interpretation, but no one else will try it but me, so there's no money at stake, plus, crazy glue can be toxic to some people, so maybe construction adhesive would work better. Just for fun anyway. More likely to work, would be string a lings, that stuck out a lot more, you could easily slip under cross sections. I was going to make some of these with a 3D printer to see if they work as well as I think they would, but they would be for rec players, not tournament. Spin a lings I call them, and they would cost $600 to design and print a first batch.

 

[CopolyX]

????
Did i go back in time...
My answer would be again is a positive no..
The five primary controls of the ball are depth, height, direction, speed, and spin.
Mastery of these controls is essential to mastery of tennis stroke production.
True spin (Topspin, Backspin, Sidespin, Ball Flight, Ball Bounce) is a key factor related to ball control, which I prefer to continually work on and control.
“Adapt what is useful, reject what is useless, and add what is specifically your own.”
― Bruce Lee

 

[moon shot]

If you are relying on snapback, then you want what is in the image below. Any way that the mains receive more friction will reduce snapback, this includes gluing them, having more crosses, having more string to string friction (see the first two) will all increase drag and kill the slim chances of the string moving and returning during contact.

Kohli looks impressed with himself

 

[kiteboard]

I guess I will have to do it and take a pic and see if it works or not.

 

[mpournaras]

I guess I will have to do it and take a pic and see if it works or not.

THat would be ideal, yes please

 

[swizzy]

no one has tried this...even the poster hasn't. they say their isn't anything new under the sun.. try it..report back to us. i want to hit the ball flatter.. i get ample spin with kevlar mains. i naturally play with quite a bit of spin.. my new string set up is more spin friendly.. and yet i know in my heart i want to play a more flat crushing ball... yet, i am unwilling to do the work on my game to realize that goal.. largely because my spin game has been a winning strategy.

 

[kiteboard]

no one has tried this...even the poster hasn't. they say their isn't anything new under the sun.. try it..report back to us. i want to hit the ball flatter.. i get ample spin with kevlar mains. i naturally play with quite a bit of spin.. my new string set up is more spin friendly.. and yet i know in my heart i want to play a more flat crushing ball... yet, i am unwilling to do the work on my game to realize that goal.. largely because my spin game has been a winning strategy.

Very honest post. To hit flatter, use a tighter pattern, and extend out straight towards the target as long and as far as you can. ala Delpotro. Coil more, plant sideways or even backwards before stepping into the shot. Extension outwards is key. Use a more powerful string: big ace micro mains, with L-tec 4s crosses, strung looser in the hitting bed area, and tighter in the perimeters.

 

[kiteboard]

Ok. So it's done. Going to spray glue and sand on it now. Going to make tiger strips also, with teeth, and a hollow tunnel to thread string through.

 

[ShahofTennis]

 

[Irvin]

stringing the crosses, ie, with super glue? So that the snap back and friction would increase and spin along with it? Would not be a spaghetti job per se, as the glue would make the strings one string inbetween the 4th-9th cross down. I'd try it with say, big ace micro mains, and gamma zo verve glued pieces: 4th-9th cross down and then string crosses after glue is dry, as an experiment for fun to see if the spin is affected much. I would say, if the glue holds, the spin would increase by about 10% or more. YOu could wrap the pieces with dental floss around the mains to hold them while drying and it would add to the extrusion. Then you could spray and glue sand on the larger surface area. I'd also like to make cc: tiger strips, with a hollow tunnel, you use to thread the main center 6, with teeth, sticking out top and bottom to that the teeth grab the ball, and you string crosses around the tiger strips like this:

I see you've modified your first post to include a picture. If you think that's a legal racket, you're wrong!

 

[WYK]

The vast majority of spin comes from the deformation of the ball and the energy imparted in to it. Poly allows one to use more force and a more acute angle, imparting more controllable spin than other strings. Fiddling with your strings in the manner you prescribe is wasting time and energy you could spend in practice that would far better increase your tennis skills.

 

[Irvin]

@kiteboard you obviously have no respect for the game and you're just looking for a new way to cheat. I'm sorry if you think that is mean. But I have little or no respect for anyone that shows no respect for the game.

 

[kiteboard]

Not a reason for anything but fun, but some are just mean period.

 

[tennisBIEST]

Wait?! Why don't you just use a thicker gauge for the main?

 

[ricardo]

I guess I will have to do it and take a pic and see if it works or not.

Do or do not.
There is no guess.

Get cracking and stop babbling because non-stop babbling is sickening!

 

[thizbit]

 

[moon shot]

I'm pretty sure John Cauthren has a patent on this.

 

[kiteboard]

glue and sand on it for spin.

 

[PrestigeDave45]

lovely

 

[rockbox]

WTF

 

[SpinToWin]

Oh lawd no!

stringing the crosses, ie, with super glue? So that the snap back and friction would increase and spin along with it? Would not be a spaghetti job per se, as the glue would make the strings one string inbetween the 4th-9th cross down. I'd try it with say, big ace micro mains, and gamma zo verve glued pieces: 4th-9th cross down and then string crosses after glue is dry, as an experiment for fun to see if the spin is affected much. I would say, if the glue holds, the spin would increase by about 10% or more. YOu could wrap the pieces with dental floss around the mains to hold them while drying and it would add to the extrusion. Then you could spray and glue sand on the larger surface area. I'd also like to make cc: tiger strips, with a hollow tunnel, you use to thread the main center 6, with teeth, sticking out top and bottom to that the teeth grab the ball, and you string crosses around the tiger strips like this:

 

[Attila_the_gorilla]

You are basically preventing snapback spin with this setup.

 

[moon shot]

You are basically preventing snapback spin with this setup.

But it has all the trappings of a classic rattan stringbed. It's favored by the majority of shipwrecked castaways.

 

[BounceHitBounceHit]

glue and sand on it for spin.

I like your creativity but isn't this just spaghetti stringing?

 

[kiteboard]

Yes. But it has a lot of spin, for fun, not for tournaments. Also going to make tiger teeth strips, with teeth facing each direction, mains through a hollow tunnel, teeth on top and bottom of strips. Super spin to train against and fun to hit for those who like spin, not legal.

 

[Attila_the_gorilla]

It definitely has less spin potential than without this modification.

 

[kiteboard]

more spin with it.

 

[MrRandom247]

I'm a real tightass who might do a partial restring on a kids racket, say 6-8 mains only...
But that is the ugliest, most embarrassing tennis thing I've ever seen.
Thick string, metal string I can understand, but in the words of the world's greatest actor
"Aw.. Hell, No!!.."

 

[moon shot]

How about a product demo, like a court level view of a rally with it and a/b something similar with normal strings.

 

[kiteboard]

Maybe after I 3d print the tiger strips, as this is just a mock up of spin a lings, tiger strips cc as I copy right the names and purpose here: to increase spin on tennis racquets. The beauty is in spin, not the look.

 

[Chotobaka]

I'm a real tightass who might do a partial restring on a kids racket, say 6-8 mains only...
But that is the ugliest, most embarrassing tennis thing I've ever seen.
Thick string, metal string I can understand, but in the words of the worlds gest actor
"Aw.. Hell, No!!.."

Nailed it. It's an abomination. This is why we need an option for negative rep on these forums. Just plain idiotic.

 

[MrRandom247]

A few years back saw a fellow experimented with metal or guitar string
Another version missing out every other main or cross string.
Not legal but a silly experiment that looks ok.

That crap looks like something Fred Flinstone would use at Quarry Tennis Club.
"Wilma!...."

 

[Attila_the_gorilla]

Maybe after I 3d print the tiger strips, as this is just a mock up of spin a lings, tiger strips cc as I copy right the names and purpose here: to increase spin on tennis racquets. The beauty is in spin, not the look.

The beauty cannot be in the spin, cos this setup prevents any string movement and snapback.

 

[Attila_the_gorilla]

Nailed it. It's an abomination. This is why we need an option for negative rep on these forums. Just plain idiotic.

Even better, people who have absolutely no idea what they're talking about, should not be allowed to post.

 

[ricardo]

The beauty cannot be in the spin, cos this setup prevents any string movement and snapback.

I fully agree.

Snapback requires the mains to move initially.
If there is no mains lateral movement, there will be no snapback.

Your stroke should be able to move the mains sideways from its original resting position.
The mains would then snapback to its original resting position, catapulting/spinning the ball along with it.

Maybe the OP would be kind enough to explain what 'snapback' really is, according to his book.
Maybe he knows something we don't know.

 

[oble]

more spin with it.

Have you actually hit with it to confirm if you really get more spin after the "modification"?

 

[Attila_the_gorilla]

Have you actually hit with it to confirm if you really get more spin after the "modification"?

With all due respect, I don't think it matters what he "feels".

What he's done is the complete opposite of spaghetti strings. Those allow totally free movement of the mains on the crosses, as the mains and crossrs are not interwoven. Creating ridiculous amounts of spin, which is why they were banned.

But on the contrary, OP has actually increased string to string friction to ensure there's virtually zero chance of any string sliding and snapback.

He's achieved almost the exact opposite of what he was trying to do.
At first I thought he actually glued the mains to the crosses. That would have been an even greater disaster.

 

[oble]

With all due respect, I don't think it matters what he "feels".

What he's done is the complete opposite of spaghetti strings. Those allow totally free movement of the mains on the crosses, as the mains and crossrs are not interwoven. Creating ridiculous amounts of spin, which is why they were banned.

But on the contrary, OP has actually increased string to string friction to ensure there's virtually zero chance of any string sliding and snapback.

He's achieved almost the exact opposite of what he was trying to do.
At first I thought he actually glued the mains to the crosses. That would have been an even greater disaster.

Yeah I'm with ya. It's just that he said he thinks his theory is correct so I'm wondering if he has actually had the chance to test out that abomination of a contraption.

 

[kiteboard]

Strange how many posters claim to know they are right without trying it.

 

[ricardo]

Strange how many posters claim to know they are right without trying it.

When you tried your so called 'vicious spin' racket, did you notice 50% more spin? More? Just curious.

I assume you already generate tremendous topspin using your well-developed topspin strokes.

 

[kiteboard]

I can but not pro levels, only about 1800 rpm when tested on my bh by John Yandell.

 

[ricardo]

I can but not pro levels, only about 1800 rpm when tested on my bh by John Yandell.

1,800 RPM. Wow!!!

You are already up there with the pros in terms of RPM.

http://www.****************.com/2-general-messages/121177-forehand-spin-rates-7-top-players.html

These stats were featured in a recent Tennis Magazine article about Federer's forehand. I found them interesting ... apologies if they have already been posted.


Forehand Spin Rates........Range............................ Average

Rafael Nadal....................... 1800-4900 r.p.m. .........3200 r.p.m.

Roger Federer.................... 1400-4500 r.p.m. ..........2700 r.p.m.

Andy Roddick..................... 1400-4200 r.p.m. ..........2700 r.p.m.

Marat Safin.......................... 900-3300 r.p.m. ..........2200 r.p.m.

Lleyton Hewitt.................... 1300-3700 r.p.m. ..........2200 r.p.m.

Andre Agassi........................ 1200-3300 r.p.m. .........1900 r.p.m.

Pete Sampras...................... 1000-3400 r.p.m. .........1800 r.p.m.

So why do you think you need more RPM over and above what you can already generate with your magnificent spin-generating strokes?

Can you ask your friend John Yandell again to measure the spin you generate using your souped-up strings?

I am sure the RPMs you can generate will be more than the top pros this time.

 

[Attila_the_gorilla]

Spin means nothing if it's not accompanied by pace. Everyone can hit slow, loopy, spinny lollipops. Lean back, brush up the back of the ball and watch it rotate.

When you can hit fast passing shots at the feet of your opponent, or you can bring the ball up and down from below net height, without sacrificing too much pace, then you can say you know how to use topspin.

Rpm's alone are worthless if they are not accompanied by pace.

The peculiar thing about snapback spin is that it works best if you hit through the ball, rather than just brush up on the back of it.
This means that it allows a much greater combination of power and spin than before slippery sttings made this possible. So the purpose of topspin in the modern game is to maximize ball speed, and still keep it in play. Rpm's alone mean nothing.