Slower snap back setups for slower RHS?

[Muppet]

I'm a 3.0, but I have pretty decent racquet head speed for my level. I noticed that the slickest strings that have the best reputation for spin have a snap back that is so quick that it seems to coincide with the ball's impact (bench testing). But I also found that my Black Force/Gutex Ultra hybrid had excellent spin for my serves, even though there was a little pause from the strings before sounding off with the snap back. What I'm taking from this is that perhaps lower level players benefit more from strings that don't snap back as immediately. Maybe a mellow poly/muti will give a recreational player as much spin as he/she can expect, and more comfort. Instead of using full poly and assuming it will give you the most spin, even for a slower stroke.

 

[Big Bagel]

A slower stroke, such as at the 3.0 level, will not benefit from poly at all. String snap back can only occur if you can bend the strings out of place to begin with, which will not happen with poly unless you swing quickly. Softer strings like a synthetic or multi will still bend out of place though, so they should be used over poly until racquet head speed increases.

 

[USPTARF97]

Many reasons behind using poly/multi at all levels. Easy on the arm and generates sufficient spin while maintaining some of the qualities of a poly stringbed such as control yet provides better feel. Poly/multi is used at high level tennis as well so as a junior progresses it plays fine and provides the arm some relief as a kid develops. Numerous players on the pro tour using poly/multi and poly/gut.

 

[Big Bagel]

Many reasons behind using poly/multi at all levels. Easy on the arm and generates sufficient spin while maintaining some of the qualities of a poly stringbed such as control yet provides better feel. Poly/multi is used at high level tennis as well so as a junior progresses it plays fine and provides the arm some relief as a kid develops. Numerous players on the pro tour using poly/multi and poly/gut and the spin they generate is sufficient.

Poly mains are not easy on the arm compared to full multi or synthetic or gut, especially after you've been on court for more than 6-8 hours and the poly goes dead. You won't get any more spin out of a poly/multi setup than you would with full multi or any other setup unless you have sufficient racquet head speed, which you won't reach until at the very least a 4.0 level, most people a 4.5 level, some not until the 5.0 level. You can get more than enough control just by increasing the tension with a full multi setup, and it will still be easier on the arm than even the thinnest poly at a low tension, and it will have better feel.

 

[Muppet]

Maybe I need to re-phrase the question a little. For a player who can marginally make use of full poly, because they almost have a quick enough stroke to bend poly well, would poly/multi be a better fit and give him better spin? I'm thinking about matching stroke speed to string bed deflection and rate of snap back. If you can find the strings that give you the best timing of ball bite and release from the string bed for the speed of your stroke (even if it's slower snap back) - would this give better performance than trying the string at the top of the market for snap back, bite, and spin?

 

[Big Bagel]

Maybe I need to re-phrase the question a little. For a player who can marginally make use of full poly, because they almost have a quick enough stroke to bend poly well, would poly/multi be a better fit and give him better spin? I'm thinking about matching stroke speed to string bed deflection and rate of snap back. If you can find the strings that give you the best timing of ball bite and release from the string bed for the speed of your stroke (even if it's slower snap back) - would this give better performance than trying the string at the top of the market for snap back, bite, and spin?

If you are a 3.0, you are not getting any benefit from poly, whether it's full bed or poly/multi hybrid. If you can swing fast enough and with the proper swing path for topspin while still maintaining enough control to get the ball in on a semi-consistent basis, you are not a 3.0. At worst you're a hard-hitting 4.0. If you can't compete with 4.0 players at least, then you are not benefitting from poly. If you think you are, then it is all mental. You will get AT LEAST the same amount of spin from a softer string setup like a full bed of multi, synthetic gut, or natural gut.

 

[USPTARF97]

Poly mains are not easy on the arm compared to full multi or synthetic or gut, especially after you've been on court for more than 6-8 hours and the poly goes dead. You won't get any more spin out of a poly/multi setup than you would with full multi or any other setup unless you have sufficient racquet head speed, which you won't reach until at the very least a 4.0 level, most people a 4.5 level, some not until the 5.0 level. You can get more than enough control just by increasing the tension with a full multi setup, and it will still be easier on the arm than even the thinnest poly at a low tension, and it will have better feel.

I agree, majority of 3.0-3.5 players we see are playing with full multi or syn gut and that is the easiest on the arm. They actually play better tennis from my experience. For those determined to use poly, poly/multi is a better choice than full poly and using much lower tension would be advised.

 

[Shroud]

Maybe I need to re-phrase the question a little. For a player who can marginally make use of full poly, because they almost have a quick enough stroke to bend poly well, would poly/multi be a better fit and give him better spin? I'm thinking about matching stroke speed to string bed deflection and rate of snap back. If you can find the strings that give you the best timing of ball bite and release from the string bed for the speed of your stroke (even if it's slower snap back) - would this give better performance than trying the string at the top of the market for snap back, bite, and spin?

Ist off if you want to increase spin then poly/multi is not a great choice as this locks the stringbed.

2nd i dont buy the “certain level and above can play poly” idea. Yes its the common wisdom to be sure but you have the physics background. How much force do you think your finger is exerting to move the strings out of place? How much force do you think is exerted by the ball racquet collision even with little incoming pace? Before the common wisdom police show up to attack me, let me say that there are good reasons for a 3.0 to not use poly but because they cant swing fast enough to get snapback...

3rd i am skeptical that one can match string snapback with swing speed simply because the swing speed is different from every shot and snapback is a product of lack of friction, tension, and string elasticity and probably other things- and those variables change over time

 

[Muppet]

If you are a 3.0, you are not getting any benefit from poly, whether it's full bed or poly/multi hybrid. If you can swing fast enough and with the proper swing path for topspin while still maintaining enough control to get the ball in on a semi-consistent basis, you are not a 3.0. At worst you're a hard-hitting 4.0. If you can't compete with 4.0 players at least, then you are not benefitting from poly. If you think you are, then it is all mental. You will get AT LEAST the same amount of spin from a softer string setup like a full bed of multi, synthetic gut, or natural gut.

I am self-rated and I'm basing my rating on lack of success playing with 3.5 and higher. The reason for this is lack of strategy and tactics as well as court sense. I've practiced against walls and practiced my serve quite a bit, so I have sound footwork, mechanics, and RHS. But the proof is in the pudding and I can't show the results. I've seen courts with 3.0 players on them. And that doesn't look like me. So I'm falling into a crack left by lack of match play. Boston, where I live, is not a mecca for tennis, so I haven't had much opportunity to develop.

Be that as it may, someone with slightly less than poly-level RHS can get better ball contact with poly/multi because the slower snap back matches his slower stroke. Ya' think?

 

[Big Bagel]

I am self-rated and I'm basing my rating on lack of success playing with 3.5 and higher. The reason for this is lack of strategy and tactics as well as court sense. I've practiced against walls and practiced my serve quite a bit, so I have sound footwork, mechanics, and RHS. But the proof is in the pudding and I can't show the results. I've seen courts with 3.0 players on them. And that doesn't look like me. So I'm falling into a crack left by lack of match play. Boston, where I live, is not a mecca for tennis, so I haven't had much opportunity to develop.

Be that as it may, someone with slightly less than poly-level RHS can get better ball contact with poly/multi because the slower snap back matches his slower stroke. Ya' think?

I don't know that it will enhance it, but I don't see it making it any worse.

 

[fuzz nation]

I am self-rated and I'm basing my rating on lack of success playing with 3.5 and higher. The reason for this is lack of strategy and tactics as well as court sense. I've practiced against walls and practiced my serve quite a bit, so I have sound footwork, mechanics, and RHS. But the proof is in the pudding and I can't show the results. I've seen courts with 3.0 players on them. And that doesn't look like me. So I'm falling into a crack left by lack of match play. Boston, where I live, is not a mecca for tennis, so I haven't had much opportunity to develop.

Be that as it may, someone with slightly less than poly-level RHS can get better ball contact with poly/multi because the slower snap back matches his slower stroke. Ya' think?

What you're offering here probably makes sense.

I personally don't put much faith in the whole snapback thing. While I readily acknowledge that it is indeed "a thing" that factors into the spin potential of a string bed, I think of poly as more of a rebound reducer compared with softer string. It takes away a little of the string bed's liveliness while still making the same amount of spin. So a slower ball (less velocity off your racquet) with the same spin means the ball turns more. Swing faster and now you get even more spin and "shape of shot". Not out to disprove anything - this is just my take on it.

Now with that in mind, I can say that easily the most popular hybrid I've been doing for stronger kids and adults in recent years has included a light gauge poly main (1.20mm) and a syn. gut cross. This seems to be a good sort of first step into the poly realm compared with using a heavy gauge poly (1.28-1.30mm) in a hybrid or a full bed of poly. This hybrid with a skinny poly in the mains is maybe just a little more firm than a full bed of 16 ga. syn. gut at a rather snug tension and I think that the hybrid doesn't turn as drastically "dead" as what can be typical of a full bed of poly.

So while the real killers can sometimes find benefits with heavier gauges of poly, I think that players with more moderate swing speeds might find some upside from the lighter gauges that can more readily deform and work a little magic on the ball. Strings will only help with dialing in a racquet that's already a pretty decent fit for somebody. Keep your expectations reasonable and you might find some better behavior with a hybrid like the one I'm describing here. It won't be pillowy soft like a premium multifiber, but it might be somewhat composed for you without feeling rock-hard.

 

[Traffic]

I think spin can be produced from deformation of the stringbed. That can come in the form of snapback, but it can come in the form of deforming a locked stringbed.

I've hit with my son's PS98 with HyperG and it hits well. But I prefer the more predictable performance I get from my tight patterned 16x19 strung with less snapback. Part of the reason is that I don't have the RHS that my son has.

For example, I don't like playing with Gut/Cream. When taking a full swing, I get great topspin on the ball. The problem is, that when I hit some other shot that isn't an all out baseline groundstroke, I get slightly different performance. Or I hit a normal rally ball with a flatter stroke, I get different performance because my normally snap-backing setup isn't snapping...

The somewhat more locked stringbed of gut/Velocity (though strings stay relatively straight) provides much more predictable performance no matter what stroke I hit.

So this could possibly support @Muppet 's theory of someone with slower RHS benefiting more from NOT using a setup with the greatest snapback.

 

[Muppet]

Ist off if you want to increase spin then poly/multi is not a great choice as this locks the stringbed.

2nd i dont buy the “certain level and above can play poly” idea. Yes its the common wisdom to be sure but you have the physics background. How much force do you think your finger is exerting to move the strings out of place? How much force do you think is exerted by the ball racquet collision even with little incoming pace? Before the common wisdom police show up to attack me, let me say that there are good reasons for a 3.0 to not use poly but because they cant swing fast enough to get snapback...

3rd i am skeptical that one can match string snapback with swing speed simply because the swing speed is different from every shot and snapback is a product of lack of friction, tension, and string elasticity and probably other things- and those variables change over time

Isn't this true for all equipment in everyone's game? I think we choose what will work best most of the time.

 

[Shroud]

Isn't this true for all equipment in everyone's game? I think we choose what will work best most of the time.

Sure. But is the tail wagging the dog? For instance with a locked stringbed certain shots are better like volleys and maybe passing shots. Launch angle is lower and more precise. But spin is less and shots can go long. Less action on the kick. At least for me.

Unlocked balls dip kicks jump etc. My synthesis is to reduce snapback a bit by using high tensions. Launch angle is less but spin is not hurt. Ymmv

 

[Muppet]

I think spin can be produced from deformation of the stringbed. That can come in the form of snapback, but it can come in the form of deforming a locked stringbed.

I've hit with my son's PS98 with HyperG and it hits well. But I prefer the more predictable performance I get from my tight patterned 16x19 strung with less snapback. Part of the reason is that I don't have the RHS that my son has.

For example, I don't like playing with Gut/Cream. When taking a full swing, I get great topspin on the ball. The problem is, that when I hit some other shot that isn't an all out baseline groundstroke, I get slightly different performance. Or I hit a normal rally ball with a flatter stroke, I get different performance because my normally snap-backing setup isn't snapping...

The somewhat more locked stringbed of gut/Velocity (though strings stay relatively straight) provides much more predictable performance no matter what stroke I hit.

So this could possibly support @Muppet 's theory of someone with slower RHS benefiting more from NOT using a setup with the greatest snapback.

Three days ago I strung HG18 in my Dunlop Aerogel 200 racquet. It feels a lot like Volkl V-Torque 17 green to me. It ran thin. I probably won't be able to hit the HG for a while, but bouncing it feels very muted and comfortable but still connected. It's full bed, and I don't think I like it compared to my other racquets with a nylon string component. I have another set and I think I'll try two hybrid setups with that one.

 

[Muppet]

Sure. But is the tail wagging the dog? For instance with a locked stringbed certain shots are better like volleys and maybe passing shots. Launch angle is lower and more precise. But spin is less and shots can go long. Less action on the kick. At least for me.

Unlocked balls dip kicks jump etc. My synthesis is to reduce snapback a bit by using high tensions. Launch angle is less but spin is not hurt. Ymmv

What are my strengths? Where do I want to improve? What strings do it all? Aaaarrrgghh!

 

[Shroud]

What are my strengths? Where do I want to improve? What strings do it all? Aaaarrrgghh!

Are you a spin player? Or more flat? What is your best shot? Fh? Serve? Which setups do you play the best with??

What makes it hard is that some combos are playable and you can win with them but it's a different style. You will know when you start winning.

But fitness and techniques are more important than strings.

 

[Muppet]

I got a reel of Red Devil and tried it in a full bed. All it did well was the kick serve. One trick pony. But it turned out to be an excellent cross string. And cheap for a reel.

 

[USPTARF97]

Lower tension with the poly/multi or poly/syn gut plays particularly well. Had some RF97’s strung from 44/48-48/52. Wicked spin at 44/48 and more stable and controllable at 48/52.

 

[Muppet]

Are you a spin player? Or more flat? What is your best shot? Fh? Serve? Which setups do you play the best with??

What makes it hard is that some combos are playable and you can win with them but it's a different style. You will know when you start winning.

But fitness and techniques are more important than strings.

I use some spin, but I don't vary shot depth using amounts of spin. My opponents can see what's coming at them pretty easily. I depend on a high service percentage to do well. When my serve goes south so does my whole game. My best shot is my forehand. I can hit good depth from the back court, hit with touch at net, or hit dirty slice from inside the baseline.

My best string setups have been poly/multi or poly/syngut (see signature). It's easy to adjust the launch angle with the cross tension. I still don't have it sorted in my mind which of these 2 is my favorite. And I've been using them for some time. Other string tests keep interfering. It's time to leave 4 of my 6 racquets at home and clear this up.