Personal Stringing Note: on diminishing tension

[tennisbike]

I like what the SM reads after stringing up a 16x19 100 sq. in. Wilson Blx Pro Open for a student, with Gamma Progression II FC drop weight stringer.

After strung, FB Prince Tournament SG 15L 2-piece FB, StringMeter reads the center 12 strings as:
47 45 42, 45 45 43 | 42 42 42, 42 47 50

Ref. tension were:
48 48 48, 51 51 51 | 51 51 51, 48 48 48

The current starting sequence: (my favorite so far)

1. Starting clamp on L2 inside frame, 1st pull on L1
2. R1, 2 and 3
3. L2, L3
4. R4, L4 and repeat

Clamping speed "long" wait, i.e. thread next string before clamping.

Conclusion/thoughts:

1. Good starting sequence going from L1, R1, 2, 3, because the SM reading shows even close to 42~43 across the 5 strings. Lower tension on the first 2 center main was not evident. (Thanks to Irvin for introducing it.)
2. Dropping 3 lbs from 4th to 6th works. This is a decent and acceptable compromise that level 4th to 6th main tension down somewhat without complicated measuring, calculating, and changing tension every string.
3. Yonex loop might help with main and specially cross. There was a 32->23 drop cross tie-up at 11B with a long long outside section plus the clamp was not able to get close to the frame. Might want to look into cam-action plier to minimize this problem.
4. The short string section between clamp and grommet is certainly under-tensioned. This is not 100% pulled out by the following pull because of the friction in the grommet. Thus how much string or distance you leave can effect the final tension. To complicate things, all strings are not at the same length, so gap would lead to more pronounce variation going toward short or side mains. And I found that I seldom was able to put my clamp close to the grommet specially on the very last main because of the mount, no matter how much tension I added, the last main tension would always be way low.

 

[Irvin]

You can increase tension by 10 lbs out that outer main and it will still be under reference tension. The more you increase tension on the last main the greater the tension loss.

 

[tennisbike]

You can increase tension by 10 lbs out that outer main and it will still be under reference tension. The more you increase tension on the last main the greater the tension loss.

Let's get this clarified: Assume the reference tension is 50 lbs. This means my target is 50 lbs. If I add 5 lbs to last main, then I pulled 55 lbs. If I add 10 lbs to last main, then I pulled at 60 lbs. But my target is still 50 lbs. Are you saying that if I pulled with 60 lbs, I will have lower measured tension than if I pull at 55 lbs?

 

[Irvin]

Let's get this clarified: Assume the reference tension is 50 lbs. This means my target is 50 lbs. If I add 5 lbs to last main, then I pulled 55 lbs. If I add 10 lbs to last main, then I pulled at 60 lbs. But my target is still 50 lbs. Are you saying that if I pulled with 60 lbs, I will have lower measured tension than if I pull at 55 lbs?

I’m saying if you pull the outer main at 55 lbs you will not have 50 lbs on the outer main after tying it off. If you tension the outer main at 60 lbs you will not see an increase 5 lbs greater than what you had at 55 lbs.

EDIT: You have a StringMeter try it and see. Let me know what happens.

Edit: Try to get 50 lbs on the outside main after tying off the outer main, and removing the clamps. Let me know how high you have to set the tensioner.

EDIT: Once you get that done switch strings and see if you get the same results.

 

[Shroud]

I like what the SM reads after stringing up a 16x19 100 sq. in. Wilson Blx Pro Open for a student, with Gamma Progression II FC drop weight stringer.

After strung, FB Prince Tournament SG 15L 2-piece FB, StringMeter reads the center 12 strings as:
47 45 42, 45 45 43 | 42 42 42, 42 47 50

Ref. tension were:
48 48 48, 51 51 51 | 51 51 51, 48 48 48

The current starting sequence: (my favorite so far)

1. Starting clamp on L2 inside frame, 1st pull on L1
2. R1, 2 and 3
3. L2, L3
4. R4, L4 and repeat

Clamping speed "long" wait, i.e. thread next string before clamping.

Conclusion/thoughts:

1. Good starting sequence going from L1, R1, 2, 3, because the SM reading shows even close to 42~43 across the 5 strings. Lower tension on the first 2 center main was not evident. (Thanks to Irvin for introducing it.)
2. Dropping 3 lbs from 4th to 6th works. This is a decent and acceptable compromise that level 4th to 6th main tension down somewhat without complicated measuring, calculating, and changing tension every string.
3. Yonex loop might help with main and specially cross. There was a 32->23 drop cross tie-up at 11B with a long long outside section plus the clamp was not able to get close to the frame. Might want to look into cam-action plier to minimize this problem.
4. The short string section between clamp and grommet is certainly under-tensioned. This is not 100% pulled out by the following pull because of the friction in the grommet. Thus how much string or distance you leave can effect the final tension. To complicate things, all strings are not at the same length, so gap would lead to more pronounce variation going toward short or side mains. And I found that I seldom was able to put my clamp close to the grommet specially on the very last main because of the mount, no matter how much tension I added, the last main tension would always be way low.

Maybe it’s just not clear but I think you should set the starting clamp with some tension already on the strings ala the yuzuki method. What is described here is setting the clamp and then pulling against it. Not sure that’s the best practice.

What happens when you “walk tension” between the mains?

anyhow I have mentioned to you in the past that the Sm is not exactly accurate and iirc the margin of error is like 3lbs. And that the ref tension is never going to show in such readings.

 

[tennisbike]

... hmm.. nothing useful to say here.

Maybe it’s just not clear but I think you should set the starting clamp with some tension already on the strings ala the yuzuki method. What is described here is setting the clamp and then pulling against it. Not sure that’s the best practice.

I agree with you. Pull two strings together before setting the first clamp is probably a good idea.
But NO, I would probably not do that since I thread L1R1 to find the center of string first, then thread L2, clamp L2. Next pulled some string so that I can pull L1. No, I do not want to pull both strings through my rotary gripper. I had many occasion where 1 of the two strings slips.
Plus my SM number shows that I did not loose tension over the center 2 mains. Thus double pull not necessary.

What happens when you “walk tension” between the mains?

I like "walk tension" from #2 and out. Without SM, you just pluck the string to get the feel of the tension as you go along. But w SM you can keep doing it until you get a good consistent numbers going down and to the side.
Of all people, you must walk the tension from #2 out.

anyhow I have mentioned to you in the past that the Sm is not exactly accurate and iirc the margin of error is like 3lbs. And that the ref tension is never going to show in such readings.

Yes, I remember your opinion very clearly. Did you find SM's "margin of error" being about 3 lbs? You must have a bad one that reads so erratically. Mine reads quite consistently. The "uncertainty" of the SM is +/-5 lbs, this means the smallest division is 5 lbs. But I can estimate or interpolate to about plus or minus 1. This means if I read 51, it can be either 50 or 52 lbs.

SM numbers tell me something about spots on my string bed that our hand nor head can.

And please do not confuse what ref. tension is and what SM readings.

 

[fritzhimself]

I like what the SM reads after stringing up a 16x19 100 sq. in. Wilson Blx Pro Open for a student, with Gamma Progression II FC drop weight stringer.

After strung, FB Prince Tournament SG 15L 2-piece FB, StringMeter reads the center 12 strings as:
47 45 42, 45 45 43 | 42 42 42, 42 47 50

Ref. tension were:
48 48 48, 51 51 51 | 51 51 51, 48 48 48

The current starting sequence: (my favorite so far)

1. Starting clamp on L2 inside frame, 1st pull on L1
2. R1, 2 and 3
3. L2, L3
4. R4, L4 and repeat

Clamping speed "long" wait, i.e. thread next string before clamping.

Conclusion/thoughts:

1. Good starting sequence going from L1, R1, 2, 3, because the SM reading shows even close to 42~43 across the 5 strings. Lower tension on the first 2 center main was not evident. (Thanks to Irvin for introducing it.)
2. Dropping 3 lbs from 4th to 6th works. This is a decent and acceptable compromise that level 4th to 6th main tension down somewhat without complicated measuring, calculating, and changing tension every string.
3. Yonex loop might help with main and specially cross. There was a 32->23 drop cross tie-up at 11B with a long long outside section plus the clamp was not able to get close to the frame. Might want to look into cam-action plier to minimize this problem.
4. The short string section between clamp and grommet is certainly under-tensioned. This is not 100% pulled out by the following pull because of the friction in the grommet. Thus how much string or distance you leave can effect the final tension. To complicate things, all strings are not at the same length, so gap would lead to more pronounce variation going toward short or side mains. And I found that I seldom was able to put my clamp close to the grommet specially on the very last main because of the mount, no matter how much tension I added, the last main tension would always be way low.

You can forget about these series of measurements anyway, because the relaxation will lose a real 20 - 25% of the put on weight within minutes.
What you are measuring is actually not the actual weight that is on. This measuring device that you use belongs in the trash can.

 

[Irvin]

The "uncertainty" of the SM is +/-5 lbs, this means the smallest division is 5 lbs. But I can estimate or interpolate to about plus or minus 1. This means if I read 51, it can be either 50 or 52 lbs.

You can forget about these series of measurements anyway, because the relaxation will lose a real 20 - 25% of the put on weight within minutes.
What you are measuring is actually not the actual weight that is on. This measuring device that you use belongs in the trash can.

John Elliot and Rod Cross found the SM to be accurate To within 3% at 25 Kgs that’s about 1 Kg. John Elliot recommended using the SM to fine tune the JET method when he came out with his initial version. Rod Cross said the best method to check tension on a string was to use strain gauges but neither end of the string are free. Rod cross said the next best method is the StringMeter then comes the ERT 700. The increments are 5 lbs on the lb scale but 1 Kg on the Kg scale.

I admit I think the tension measure is an estimate but a damn good one. I do not expect to get accurate readings but +/- 2 lbs is good enough for me. I have 2 SMs one I keep by by stringer the other in my bag.

 

[fritzhimself]

John Elliot and Rod Cross found the SM to be accurate To within 3% at 25 Kgs that’s about 1 Kg. John Elliot recommended using the SM to fine tune the JET method when he came out with his initial version. Rod Cross said the best method to check tension on a string was to use strain gauges but neither end of the string are free. Rod cross said the next best method is the StringMeter then comes the ERT 700. The increments are 5 lbs on the lb scale but 1 Kg on the Kg scale.

I admit I think the tension measure is an estimate but a damn good one. I do not expect to get accurate readings but +/- 2 lbs is good enough for me. I have 2 SMs one I keep by by stringer the other in my bag.

@Irvin Believe me my friend -so I can prove to you 100% that the whole thing is not true.

 

[Irvin]

@Irvin Believe me my friend -so I can prove to you 100% that the whole thing is not true.

Ok prove it to me. I’m all ears.

 

[MathieuR]

@fritzhimself , It is some time ago, but I tested the stringmeter on the mains while tensioning that main with a Stringway automatic dropweight ( = "real" cp )

On that "free string" measurement it was accurate. For a stringbed it just gives "a number" you can use to see stringtension drop while you play.

 

[fritzhimself]

Yes, I agree with you that only a "number" is displayed after weaving - but never the desired weight.
What astonishes me a little bit is the incoming post from @tennisbike where he takes these measurements - that can never be right.
There he is lying to himself.
I have a stable model vise with hardened guides. On this vise I have built up a measuring device. I can keep the string in tension at a distance of about 25 cm from the measuring device. Within 90 seconds at least 3 kg are gone due to relaxation.
But it is not clamped - the 25 kg are still there (without readjustment) and the relaxation is a constant companion.
If you are already missing 3 kg after 90 seconds with this test setup, you will never be able to measure the set weight with the string meter after 30 minutes.
And it gets even worse if you clamp the strings.

 

[MathieuR]

@fritzhimself , pre-stretch at 40kg, tension at 20kg, then your measurement after 30 minutes will be close to 20kg

 

[tennisbike]

.. the relaxation is a constant companion.

I am impressed that you performed some test and has actual experience. I do appreciate that because most people share opinions without having much base.

One true about strings is indeed it gets longer as it gets stretched or tensioned. This is tested by you and by every single person who tested strings. There is no debate on this issue.

Next please share something that you know that can further the art of stringing.

 

[Irvin]

Yes, I agree with you that only a "number" is displayed after weaving - but never the desired weight.

When I string a racket on my Star 5 and immediately measure the mains with the SM the readings are actually quite close. By quite close I mean down maybe by 5%. At 50 lbs I’ll usually get maybe a 2-4 lb drop.

 

[Irvin]

Stringmeter: An Ode to Accuracy | GGT Extra

 

[Irvin]

Don’t believe anything you hear and only half of what you see.

Why Your Brain Clings To False Beliefs (Even When It Knows Better)

We evolved to be not just gullible, but stubborn.

www.fastcompany.com

 

[Irvin]

If I string a racket with my X-2 the reading I get on the StringMeter are way under reference tension. If I string 2 matched like rackets one on my Star 5 and one on my X-2 I can measure the difference with my SM. I can hear the difference with my ears when I ping them together. I can measure the difference with RacquetTune in all aspects of measuring like frequency of the stringbed, SBS, and tension. I can even tell the difference when I hit because the strings sound different and move around more.

If all I had to base my assumptions on were the DW with flying clamps and the SM and I assumed because I strung my racket at 50 lbs and the SM did not read anything close to that I would probably think because everyone tells me the SM is not accurate that it wasn’t. But that’s not the case.

 

[Goodman]

Irvin is on a rampage! Let's all submit to his brilliance so he will stop now and eat lunch.

 

[Rabbit]

Well submitting may work, but ignoring is an absolute fix.

 

[fritzhimself]

Here's the video.
Did it with my mobile phone - it's a bit blurry - sorry for the bad quality - but it's enough to get the message across.
As you can see it's a very solid construction. Nothing gives way there. Anyway, the string is also stretched about 25 kilos and then just watched. That is pure power without "constant pull",
In a tennis racquet there is even more action because the frame is not made of steel. If you clamp off the string the value is then as well as in the cellar.
This is just an example of what happens in a frame while stringing - the whole thing consists of losses.

Btw - after 90 seconds the value was still at 22.34 kg That is more than 10%.
If you tighten 25 kg on a Poly, the real 17 -18 kg is the stringbed stiffnes where you play the ball.
So I cannot believe that a string meter can be used to determine the correct value of a string that is already relaxed.

 

[Irvin]

That’s it? You can’t believe a StringMeter can measure a relaxed string? That’s your proof?

 

[fritzhimself]

I know that a stringmeter is a useless thing - what else do you want to know?

 

[ttbrowne]

I know that a stringmeter is a useless thing - what else do you want to know?

That's your "opinion". Now you need to prove your statement. I'm curious to see it.

 

[tennisbike]

I know that a stringmeter is a useless thing - what else do you want to know?

Do you string rackets? And how do you know your string job is good?

 

[fritzhimself]

That's your "opinion". Now you need to prove your statement. I'm curious to see it.

I have been to the Isospeed factory in the research department several times. They have incredibly precise measuring instruments.
A string meter can't compete with a ridiculous steel spring.
That's exactly what I doubt - with my experimental setup the force of 25kg is applied and held.
Nevertheless, in this short time the relaxation already starts - after a few seconds 100% of the reference force is never again on it.
With the SM it is pretended to measure this correctly. I do not want to say more about this.
Actually, there is no instrument (excl. strain gauge DMS, and this only in a special form) which can correctly measure the finished stringbed on every single string.
@tennisbike I measure my stringing jobs with a Babolat RDC at about 500 racquets a year. I also believe that I know what I am doing and measuring.

 

[afeller]

So I cannot believe that a string meter can be used to determine the correct value of a string that is already relaxed.

Full ack... Especially every string have a different elongation. Also some holds the tension better, some will stretch easier, some are stiffer, etc...
Here is an extreme example -> put 25 kg on a thin 1,25 mm steel rod. Now i will see the result of the SM.

I don't like the tools as an ERT or SM. If you accept the results just as a value for referece for this one racket and this one string, its maybe ok.
I tested ERT300 and ERT700 and sometimes you can setup the device more or less the same and you get different results.
I think one of the best way to measure a stringbed is to "pull down" it like a RDC or a stringlab. All other measurements depends on too many factors.

And I never understand why some people would convert the result from a ERT, SM, RDC to a "compareable: tension. This are two completely different values.

 

[Rabbit]

IME, if you follow instructions, the ERT300 is a useful tool for checking the condition of your string bed. It is not an absolute, rather a gauge of the dynamic tension. In other words, used consistently it renders consistent results. I've seen WTA players use it on fresh string jobs to verify the tension is correct. For them, it's a consistent measure and they do earn their livings playing tennis.

And keep in mind, to tournament players, reference tension (the tension requested for a stringing) has little bearing. It is a starting place. If you constantly get your frames strung by different stringers at different locations, reference tension is just a starting place.

In the end both are just numbers. One, dynamic tension, is of a more consistent nature to a tournament player. The other, reference tension, is more useful to those who get their racket strung by the same person each and every time.

Racquet Tune is kind of like Rod Cross' theories in my opinion. It's a great theory, but the implementation leaves something to be desired.

I've no experience with Tourna's String Meter.

Overall, if any of these gadgets give you confidence enough to concentrate on your tennis and not your equipment and the off pound then by all means, they're the greatest things since sliced bread.

 

[Rafedovic]

String meter and racquet tune are simple and affordable devices that stringers and players can use as some kind of way of comparing apple with apples, aren’t they? They aren’t useless garbage, they just need to be used with consideration as far as I can tell.

 

[Rafedovic]

...or are the objectors claiming there are too many variables to consider for it to be useful?

 

[fritzhimself]

@fritzhimself , pre-stretch at 40kg, tension at 20kg, then your measurement after 30 minutes will be close to 20kg

no wonder - you overstretch the string so that it gets into plastic deformation and is then absolutely dead - what is the Point?

 

[fritzhimself]

String meter and racquet tune are simple and affordable devices that stringers and players can use as some kind of way of comparing apple with apples, aren’t they? They aren’t useless garbage, they just need to be used with consideration as far as I can tell.

Maybe this link will help you to look at it from a different perspective.

String Machine vs Racquet Tension

During stringing, a calibrated string machine pulls the strings with a preset tension. However, this tension is NOT the same as the tension in the finished racquet, not even directly after stringin…

appmaker.se

Quote: "Creep/stress relaxation. All strings experience deformation leading to tension loss over time. This process is initiated immediately following clamping of the strings. The degree of tension loss varies with the material of the string – polyester tends to lose the most – and the effect is enhanced by high temperatures. Within 30 min, the strings may have lost 2-6 kg of Tension."

 

[am1899]

John Elliot and Rod Cross found the SM to be accurate To within 3% at 25 Kgs that’s about 1 Kg. John Elliot recommended using the SM to fine tune the JET method when he came out with his initial version. Rod Cross said the best method to check tension on a string was to use strain gauges but neither end of the string are free. Rod cross said the next best method is the StringMeter then comes the ERT 700. The increments are 5 lbs on the lb scale but 1 Kg on the Kg scale.

I admit I think the tension measure is an estimate but a damn good one. I do not expect to get accurate readings but +/- 2 lbs is good enough for me. I have 2 SMs one I keep by by stringer the other in my bag.

John Elliot has also implied that eCP machines kill the playability of polyester string, and that flying clamps have less drawback than fixed clamps. He seems to be drowning in Stringway flavored KoolAid these days, so I generally take his statements with a grain of salt.

OTOH, Rod Cross comes across as an intelligent, thorough scientist, with an impressive background. So I’m intrigued by his statements about the SM. I wonder what other tools he may have compared it to? Just the ERT700?

That said, I think (some) people oversell the usefulness of devices like the SM...and sometimes make dubious conclusions, based upon the readings they observe. I think the SM has a place though, in the hands of someone who understands its limitations.

String meter and racquet tune are simple and affordable devices that stringers and players can use as some kind of way of comparing apple with apples, aren’t they? They aren’t useless garbage, they just need to be used with consideration as far as I can tell.

Agreed.

 

[Rafedovic]

no wonder - you overstretch the string so that it gets into plastic deformation and is then absolutely dead - what is the Point?

Maybe @MathieuR likes it better that way? That would be an acceptable point.

 

[Rafedovic]

I think the SM has a place though, in the hands of someone who understands its limitations.

I’ll buy one to get objective feedback about my very amateur stringing, particularly tension symmetry in my mains, consistency from one job to the next and checking for tension stabilization. All these are important to me at the moment and I can do it cheap with string meter.

 

[Irvin]

John Elliot has also implied that eCP machines kill the playability of polyester string, and that flying clamps have less drawback than fixed clamps. He seems to be drowning in Stringway flavored KoolAid these days, so I generally take his statements with a grain of salt.

I hear where your coming from but I have an X-2 with those plastic Gamma clamps and a Star 5. The Gamma flying clamps have less drawback. I’ve measured the tension on the string strung with an X-2 and my Star 5 and if I looking at a string outside the frame the tension is the same. But after stringing a racket the tension is lower in a racket strung on the X-2 compared to the Star 5. I think I could get the same tension and feel with the DW if I increased the tension but I’ve never tried. If I did I believe I would then need to over tension the string initially. I like both even though when measuring the tensions with a Stringmeter I see a 6-8 lb difference in tension. Go figure, I try not to think too much.

OTOH, Rod Cross comes across as an intelligent, thorough scientist, with an impressive background. So I’m intrigued by his statements about the SM. I wonder what other tools he may have compared it to? Just the ERT700?

Even though it comes from Rod Cross I don’t believe everything I hear and try to keep an open mind. I don’t think a SM, tension app, ERT, or RDC is perfect but all are just tools and I rarely use any of them for myself. But it amazes me how the data I see is so similar. If you’re looking for the actual tension on a string it has been said you have to use strain gauges but that’s easier said than done. And with all the friction between crossed strings I doubt that accurate either unless you’re talking about the point on the string where the strain gauge is attached.

That said, I think (some) people oversell the usefulness of devices like the SM

Not all of us. But if someone comes up with a better gadget they’ll make a lot of money.

 

[am1899]

I hear where your coming from but I have an X-2 with those plastic Gamma clamps and a Star 5. The Gamma flying clamps have less drawback. I’ve measured the tension on the string strung with an X-2 and my Star 5 and if I looking at a string outside the frame the tension is the same. But after stringing a racket the tension is lower in a racket strung on the X-2 compared to the Star 5. I think I could get the same tension and feel with the DW if I increased the tension but I’ve never tried. If I did I believe I would then need to over tension the string initially. I like both even though when measuring the tensions with a Stringmeter I see a 6-8 lb difference in tension. Go figure, I try not to think too much.

Out of curiosity then, to what do you attribute the lower tension from the X-2 string job?

Even though it comes from Rod Cross I don’t believe everything I hear and try to keep an open mind.

I agree. But Rod strikes me as quite a bit more objective than John Elliott, for example.

Not all of us. But if someone comes up with a better gadget they’ll make a lot of money.

I agree.

 

[fritzhimself]

IME, if you follow instructions, the ERT300 is a useful tool for checking the condition of your string bed. It is not an absolute, rather a gauge of the dynamic tension. In other words, used consistently it renders consistent results. ………….

The ERT also shows limitations in a hybrid stringbed.
There the vibrations recorded in the background cannot be converted into a (real) measurable result.
When Mr. Beers, the founder of the ERT, was at a renowned string manufacturer with the first model (ERT 1000) and presented his product, a test was made. On the stringing machine the display was taped and Mr. Beers watched the stringing process. Then he measured the fresh stringing with his "invention" and proudly announced "There are 23kg" on the racquet. In reality, a Kevlar string was strung lengthways/ crossways and 5kg and showed the measuring device its limits. After he said his result, the tape was taken off the display and he left the factory with a red head and without a greeting……...

 

[Irvin]

Out of curiosity then, to what do you attribute the lower tension from the X-2 string job?

I’m not really sure, I‘ll have to play with it more. My guess is it is the stretch on the strings. I’m going to mark the string next to the grommets the next time I string my 315s. I was planning on stringing 1 on each machine. Something I’d never do on a customers rackets.

I agree. But Rod strikes me as quite a bit more objective than John Elliott, for example.

My guess is Rod’s results are based on research while JE’s are biased on sales.

 

[MathieuR]

no wonder - you overstretch the string so that it gets into plastic deformation and is then absolutely dead - what is the Point?

Yes, you overstretch, but the string is not dead. If you use this prestretched string, and compare it with a "new" string you will see that the elastic elongation is not (much) changed.

 

[am1899]

Yes, you overstretch, but the string is not dead. If you use this prestretched string, and compare it with a "new" string you will see that the elastic elongation is not (much) changed.

Regardless, pre-stretching string like that will change the playability significantly.

 

[fritzhimself]

I’ll buy one to get objective feedback about my very amateur stringing, particularly tension symmetry in my mains, consistency from one job to the next and checking for tension stabilization. All these are important to me at the moment and I can do it cheap with string meter.

Well - would want to read before on page 39/40 the very interesting article from Greg Raven...…!

Racquet Sports Industry | PDF | Racquet Sports | Sports

Racquet Sports Industry magazine, October 2004

de.scribd.com

 

[Irvin]

Yes, you overstretch, but the string is not dead. If you use this prestretched string, and compare it with a "new" string you will see that the elastic elongation is not (much) changed.

After a racket has been strung and played with the string becomes plastically deformed. If you cut the string out of the racket the string doesn’t return to its original shape because It’s what I consider dead. If the string does not break (or get cut out) I would agree if you hit a ball the string will deform and return back to their original shape (somewhat.) Therefore they are still elastic, but most people do not like the results plastically deformed strings provide in terms of feel, playability, or durability.

 

[Rafedovic]

Well - would want to read before on page 39/40 the very interesting article from Grag Raven...…!

Racquet Sports Industry | PDF | Racquet Sports | Sports

Racquet Sports Industry magazine, October 2004

de.scribd.com

I read the article, it pretty much say to use string meter exactly how I said I would use it: relative tension measurements. @fritzhimself , why are you on this anti string meter crusade? What did string meter ever do to you? I fully understand it’s limitations, I just don’t understand the point you are trying to make.

 

[fritzhimself]

I think you can believe what you want.
Even I have some machines to measure the stringbed stiffness.
In former times people thought that the earth is a disc - but no matter, everyone is the architect of his own luck.

 

[Rafedovic]

I think something happened. Like maybe you worked for some big tennis company like babolat, with expensive, high tech, extremely accurate measuring equipment, but you used to carry string meter in you tennis bag for convenience. One day maybe you reach into your tennis bag, between sets, for a fresh over grip and string meter falls out, right in front of your babolat work college...or just maybe boss? Of course you are fired shortly thereafter for some minor, trumped up accusation but you know the real reason. Maybe due to the loss of your dream job your life spirals out of control?....but....you are strong. You pull yourself together, holding onto the hope that you can warn others about the obvious inadequacies, inherent with such a primitive device that everyone seems so oblivious to???

 

[Rafedovic]

...or maybe I’ve had a couple too many bourbons?

 

[fritzhimself]

I think something happened. Like maybe you worked for some big tennis company like babolat, with expensive, high tech, extremely accurate measuring equipment, but you used to carry string meter in you tennis bag for convenience. One day maybe you reach into your tennis bag, between sets, for a fresh over grip and string meter falls out, right in front of your babolat work college...or just maybe boss? Of course you are fired shortly thereafter for some minor, trumped up accusation but you know the real reason. Maybe due to the loss of your dream job your life spirals out of control?....but....you are strong. You pull yourself together, holding onto the hope that you can warn others about the obvious inadequacies, inherent with such a primitive device that everyone seems so oblivious to???

I'm afraid there's not a nuance of your thinking right.
What's so bad about a $15 piece of equipment not being able to do the work it's designed to do?
If you hold your head slightly tilted and collect your brain on one side, you should be able to come up with that result yourself.
I don't really care why you want to put me in your mentally predestined corner - maybe it's because you've watched too many crime shows on TV.
By the way, I think that the USA have been on the moon several times.

 

[Rafedovic]

Fritz: SM is crap for xyz.
Me: that’s ok, I’m not using it for xyz I will use it for abc.
Somebody else: SM is crap for xyz but ok for abc.
Me: yeah cool, I need help with abc.
Fritz: but look at this article it say SM is crap
Me: I read article and it says SM is crap for xyz but ok for abc.
You: Believe what you want. I have stringbed stiffness machines. Flat earth.
Me: I think SM must have ruined your life or something.
You: but SM is crap for xyz, tilt your head to the side, space missions to the moon.

I think the SM has a place though, in the hands of someone who understands its limitations.

...perhaps you, fritz, are the one who doesn’t understand SM’s limitations and that’s why you can’t find a place for it.

xyz = accurate tension measurement of an individual string, of any material, in any racquet, alone or in combination with any other type of string as part of a string bed.

abc = Proportionally observe rate of change in a single string’s tension over time, or, proportionally relate one string’s tension to another string’s tension, of the same material type, in the same situation, in unspecified units.

 

[Rafedovic]

Ok, I’ve made a few mistakes here.

I’m off topic and stinking up someone else’s thread, which I hate. Sorry @tennisbike.

@fritzhimself, maybe I didn’t explain my thoughts well enough, and because I’m off topic, you misunderstood my thoughts.

...and I assumed someone called fritz would have a sense of humor.