Has anyone tried gluing short pieces of string, the mains, where the snap back occurs, before string
- Thread starter kiteboard
- Start date
A
Attila_the_gorilla
Guest
I assume you compared it before and after your equipment brain fade?
69mph!!! Wow!!! You are definitely up there with the top pros in terms of spin and ball pace.
Base on your claims, and I believe you, your spin and ball pace are comparable to the top ATP pros.
So why do you think you need more spin?
Why do you demean yourself by using this contraption just to generate at the most, inconsequential increase in spin.
A
Attila_the_gorilla
Guest
I actually respect people who experiment and customize their equipment, but problem with this is that it will actually result in a decrease in spin production, given the same swingspeed and swingpath.
Cos it substantially increases string to string friction. Snapback spin is not a difficult concept to understand, but a lot of people on this forum seem to have an issue grasping it.
Just for fun, an experiment, I'd never seen anyone do, and I'd like to make plastic insert, with teeth, and a hollow tunnel the mains would occupy as a 3-D print mock up. Tiger strip spin a lings.
A
Attila_the_gorilla
Guest
When the Tennis Warehouse University did an experiment with strings, they found that string to ball friction makes virtually no difference in spin production. Basically all strings can "grab" the ball to pretty much the same extent, regardless how rough or smooth they are, under most common realistic circumstances. The reason for this is that the ball sinks into the stringbed on contact and the ball's surface is rough enough that any string will bite into it.
Ball to string friction would be helpful if the ball were a smooth and rigid object. But it's rough and flexible.
A
Attila_the_gorilla
Guest
This is what does my head in. Who would be a teacher? Goodness me.
string to ball friction makes virtually no difference in spin production.
You may be right.
If that is true, why does TWU state that Spin Potential (SP) is the ratio of the ball-to-string coefficient of friction (COF) divided by the string-to-string COF? (http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/learning_center/spinpotentialtool.php).
Is TWU contradicting itself? Maybe TWU is wrong? Maybe I am wrong. Please explain.
TWU excerpts:
A large SP indicates a higher spin potential.
For a given string installed in both the mains and crosses, spin potential is the ratio of the string-to-ball stickiness divided by the string-to-string slipperiness (string-to-ball COF / string-to-string COF). The higher the ratio, the greater the spin potential. If the string-to-string friction is low, the main strings will slide along the crosses and snap-back. If the string-to-ball friction is high, the strings will grab the ball during the snap-back. This combination adds incremental spin to the ball.
The ideal combination for a string is to have high string-to-ball friction and low string-to-string friction. However, this does not always apply to hybrids. How a string behaves with itself does not mean that it will behave similarly with a string of another material. For example, gut mains and crosses don't slide on each other. They have a high string-to-string COF. But gut mains on gut polyester crosses is the slipperiest combination of all.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
the slipperiest combination of all.
This statement does not necessarily imply that it is also the spinniest combination of all.
Last edited:
A
Attila_the_gorilla
Guest
Maybe I misunderstood the following statement:
"...in general, it can be said that all strings produce the same spin up to the bite stage, and after that, friction events tend to cancel each other, apart from small variances in the timing and direction of these events."
http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/learning_center/stringmovementPart2.php
I actually do think that gut/poly is the spinniest combination. Simply because of gut's elasticity / high power level. It returns more energy onto the ball in the vertical plane, which is what generates the spin.
EDIT:
I think I see where the issue lies. My quoted paragraph is referring to a locked stringbed, before the article moves on to explain string snapback. And a locked stringbed is pretty much what the OP has created, so I had that in mind when I made my statement.
Whereas your quoted material talks about the string to ball friction adding spin IF snapback is allowed to occur.
In the OP's stringbed, string movement and snapback is pretty much impossible due to the huge amount of string-to-string friction. So string to ball friction has no chance to be of any use.
Last edited by a moderator:
Irvin
Talk Tennis Guru
Not ture reference - http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/learning_center/spinandfriction.php
Paragraph fro the Conclusion.
In the end, you are likely to get more spin with a string with a higher string-to-ball coefficient of friction. Perhaps not always and probably not a great deal more. More and more friction does not mean more and more spin. More string-to-ball friction definitely increases torque, but it does so for less time. A lower COF string will have lower average friction force, but it will maintain it for a longer period of time. Both strings work to increase spin until the contact velocity equals 0. At Vc = 0, both the high and low COF strings will have achieved the same spin (assuming they are the same string but one has been roughed up). But since strings of differing COFs change spin at different rates, the exit spins are likely to be different. The string with the most spin will be the one whose Vc was closest to 0 when the ball leaves the stringbed.
EDIT: Here is another thread where it was found that rough string does make a difference.
https://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/ind...spaghetti-stringing-in-a-legal-format.536902/
A
Attila_the_gorilla
Guest
"...in general, it can be said that all strings produce the same spin up to the bite stage, and after that, friction events tend to cancel each other, apart from small variances in the timing and direction of these events."
http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/learning_center/stringmovementPart2.php
Irvin
Talk Tennis Guru
You should have included the next paragraph too. In my own words it says they can't really prove snap back produces more spin. I do not that SnapBack is a major contributor to spin in itself. I think the major contributors are the racket, speed of racket, angle of racket, and string to ball friction. String to ball friction being the major contributor all else being equal. If someone feels one string produces more spin that another using the same strokes and racket there are only two possibilities. 1 is SnapBack, and 2 is string to ball friction. The string snap back so fast the inertia of the ball inselt will never allow the ball to spin. But if the string to ball friction is greater the angled movement of the racket will start the ball to spin.
Of course all of this is just conjecture on my part because I've never made any tests. But I do think Kevlar produces more spin for me than any other string. And Kevlar is a very high friction stiff string which both cause more bite into the ball.
A
Attila_the_gorilla
Guest
Oh you're another one of those "the Earth is flat" guys. Well you do have a very unique way of understanding English. Quote: "The end result is that string movement and snap-back very strongly correlate with more spin."
However, they also say that: "...it must be remembered that just because a particular string has better spin properties, that does not mean that the player will be able to hit more spin with it. The main contributors to spin, over and above the equipment, are the speed and angle of the swing. If the equipment setup causes the player, for control, strategic, or confidence reasons, to alter the swing, then there may be a decrease in spin. Alternatively, the player might speed up the swing or increase the attack angle or racquet tilt and get even more spin. That, probably, is the reason that lab tests and playtests don't always agree for everyone."
So "in my own words" this means that playing with kevlar may give you greater confidence to swing fast, hence the illusion that it is a spin friendly string.
