Snapback... seriously?

kingcheetah

Hall of Fame
I've seen a lot of comments about "snapback" of strings on here lately and while it is something that exists, racquet head speed and actually getting below the ball have way more to do with the spin that a shot has... I don't get how people can blabber about the movement of the strings doing so much when they aren't even getting below the ball.
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
Yes, it is true that technique trumps all. It is however also true that strings with free string movement and thus good snapback allow an easier access to spin (along with a higher launch angle). Some will benefit from this, others won't. In the end, it's the player and his game that matters (determines which setup suits him) regardless of what results labs predict.

You won't find many people saying they use syn gut for the spin advantages though. That's found with setups that exhibit the characteristics you mention here, most notably full poly.
 
Last edited:

ultradr

Legend
There were a few research papers on these(from Japan I think) and some people also often refer to main reasons why the spaghetti string pattern was banned.

It goes without saying the technique is the main issue but I presume all these talks about string movements assume we are all aware of that..
 

fgs

Hall of Fame
you ar putting the cart before the horses!!! in order to snap back it has to be moved out of place first - a flat stroke will hardly make the string moving but a stroke with an upward motion, as a topspin-shot should have, does exert a force on the main that will have it moving out of place and giving it thus the possibility to snap-back and basically enhance the spin production inherent in the stroking mechanics already. so what has been talked about is like getting a turbo boost provided you come up with the proper technique. on a perfectly flat stroke there will be no or definitely negligible snap-back as the forces applied to the string are producing a different deformation.
 

cuteflu

New User
I've seen a lot of comments about "snapback" of strings on here lately and while it is something that exists, racquet head speed and actually getting below the ball have way more to do with the spin that a shot has... I don't get how people can blabber about the movement of the strings doing so much when they aren't even getting below the ball.
http://1drv.ms/1Kfw0t5
 
A

Attila_the_gorilla

Guest
Snapback allows you to hit the ball with more pace and still not overhit. That's where the advantage is. Even in the times before slippery crosses, there were moonballers out there, but it was much harder to hit with pace and keep the ball in play, due to the lack of snapback spin.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Aretium

Hall of Fame
Why is everyone talking like snapback is a technique. Snapback is a result or a result before spin occurs.
 

LeeD

Bionic Poster
Let's figure out a case WITHOUT any snapback.
Your strings, after the first couple of hit's, is fanned shaped, stretched to the limit, with no more give.
Plays like a board, doesn't it?
Now, let's straighten the strings after each hit. Plays fine, doesn't it? And YOU straightened it, so you snapped it back.
 
A

Attila_the_gorilla

Guest
Straightening the strings by hand has nothing to do with snapback spin.
 

LeeD

Bionic Poster
Actually, it does!
Once the strings are displaced by previous hits, there is no more give, so it plays like a board, like a racket with string intersects full of string savers. You DO know that string savers lock the intersection of the strings together without any give, don't you?
And it plays like a board, even using only 6 string savers in the middle of the string bed.
So, once your strings are displaced, they can't move any further unless you flip your racket around, strings locked.
Obviously, we prefer to play with strings that MOVE A LITTLE! Snapback could be a slow movement back to original position after the ball has left the racket. Or, it could be as YOU think of, that the snap movement provides a bit of extra spin by SNAPping back into place.
 

Shroud

G.O.A.T.
Snapback allows you to hit the ball with more pace and still not overhit. That's where the advantage is. Even in the times before slippery crosses, there were moonballers out there, but it was much harder to hit with pace and keep the ball in play, due to the lack of snapback spin.
Yep! And I think if you think about it, a bed that allows snapback can be more arm friendly than one that doesnt.
 
A

Attila_the_gorilla

Guest
Snapback could be a slow movement back to original position after the ball has left the racket. Or, it could be as YOU think of, that the snap movement provides a bit of extra spin by SNAPping back into place.
And like you say, the first one has nothing to do with generating extra spin, whereas the second one does. That was my point, which you're actually now confirming even though you tried to argue against it.
 

ricardo

Hall of Fame
Actually, it does!
Once the strings are displaced by previous hits, there is no more give, so it plays like a board, like a racket with string intersects full of string savers. You DO know that string savers lock the intersection of the strings together without any give, don't you?
And it plays like a board, even using only 6 string savers in the middle of the string bed.
So, once your strings are displaced, they can't move any further unless you flip your racket around, strings locked.
Obviously, we prefer to play with strings that MOVE A LITTLE! Snapback could be a slow movement back to original position after the ball has left the racket. Or, it could be as YOU think of, that the snap movement provides a bit of extra spin by SNAPping back into place.
so it plays like a board, like a racket with string intersects full of string savers. You DO know that string savers lock the intersection of the strings together without any give

I don't think this statement applies to all string savers.
If you are referring to tourna string savers, you are correct. Tourna SS increases string/string friction a lot.
However, Babolat Elastocross SS do not increase string/string friction. It actually reduces string/string friction significantly.
It makes the strings slippery. It makes the string move/slide against each other.

I have been using Babolat Elastocross for years.
I also re-use them repeatedly and they remain slippery.

I also use lubricants like coconut oil, mineral oil, gun oil, etc.
and they make the strings slippery. However, they don't last very long, maybe an hour.
They are also messy.
 

Irvin

Talk Tennis Guru
I believe the
Why is everyone talking like snapback is a technique. Snapback is a result or a result before spin occurs.
Where is the SnapBack when a ball hit a tennis court? Throw a ball on a tennis court and and the only way it will not spin is when it traveling at 90 degrees to the court. The greater the angle the greater the spin. Friction causes spin. The better you technique to produce spin and the greater the friction between the string and ball the greater the spin.

EDIT: More often than not the greater the spin the greater the SnapBack. They are both the result of angles, ball to string friction, string to string friction, and velocity. I wonder is a stationary stringbed or a hard tennis court would produce the most spin. I'd put my money on the court because the ball would slide across the strings where the court surface would have more friction and force the bal to spin or stop.
 
Last edited:

Aretium

Hall of Fame
I believe the


Where is the SnapBack when a ball hit a tennis court? Throw a ball on a tennis court and and the only way it will not spin is when it traveling at 90 degrees to the court. The greater the angle the greater the spin. Friction causes spin. The better you technique to produce spin and the greater the friction between the string and ball the greater the spin.
Irvin, this is simply one of many factors. If the strings did not move at all and did not snapback, of course there would be spin, but why is it the strings that generate the most spin (poly) are slick. Non-poly strings are much rougher so by your logic they would impart the most spin.

All in all, people care about spin way too much.
 

Irvin

Talk Tennis Guru
Irvin, this is simply one of many factors. If the strings did not move at all and did not snapback, of course there would be spin, but why is it the strings that generate the most spin (poly) are slick. Non-poly strings are much rougher so by your logic they would impart the most spin.

All in all, people care about spin way too much.
Poly string DO NOT produce the most spin. They are a close second though. Kevlar produces the most spin.

Using the old spaghetti pattern produced more spring because the string bed provided more friction. Spin and SnapBack were more pronounced because of the ball to string bed friction.

Saying SnapBack causes spin is like saying dents causes accidents. Because every time you have an accident in your car you end up with a dent. SnapBack does not occur until after the ball leaves the strings. If the ball is not spinning when it leaves the stringbed it will never spin unless it hits something else (like the court) that it deflects off of.
 

MisterP

Hall of Fame
Poly string DO NOT produce the most spin. They are a close second though. Kevlar produces the most spin.

Using the old spaghetti pattern produced more spring because the string bed provided more friction. Spin and SnapBack were more pronounced because of the ball to string bed friction.

Saying SnapBack causes spin is like saying dents causes accidents. Because every time you have an accident in your car you end up with a dent. SnapBack does not occur until after the ball leaves the strings. If the ball is not spinning when it leaves the stringbed it will never spin unless it hits something else (like the court) that it deflects off of.
From our resident TW scientists:

"The end result is that string movement and snap-back very strongly correlate with more spin."

http://twu.tennis-warehouse.com/learning_center/stringmovementPart2.php

Visual aid:

 

kingcheetah

Hall of Fame
I'm just saying that the vast majority of players aren't accelerating hard enough to see 'snapback' benefits make a noticeable difference, such as the player using poly when a multi would be a better choice.
 

Irvin

Talk Tennis Guru
From our resident TW scientists:

"The end result is that string movement and snap-back very strongly correlate with more spin."...
I've read that document along with the other 4 that were written on the same subject but I don't believe everything I hear and read. More oftern than not any stroke that produces more spin has more snap back but that does not mean the snap back produces the spin. If it did any string that has the most ball to string friction and the least string to string friction would produce the most snap back and therefore the most spin.
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
I'm just saying that the vast majority of players aren't accelerating hard enough to see 'snapback' benefits make a noticeable difference, such as the player using poly when a multi would be a better choice.
Oh definitely. That mustn't be the case for everybody around here though, so I do see some merit in discussing this.

I've read that document along with the other 4 that were written on the same subject but I don't believe everything I hear and read. More oftern than not any stroke that produces more spin has more snap back but that does not mean the snap back produces the spin. If it did any string that has the most ball to string friction and the least string to string friction would produce the most snap back and therefore the most spin.
 
I'm just saying that the vast majority of players aren't accelerating hard enough to see 'snapback' benefits make a noticeable difference, such as the player using poly when a multi would be a better choice.
But now realize this: You need TONS of racquet head speed to displace stiff poly mains. Most of the rec players don't have that, and shouldn't use poly mains. BUT, put soft elastic strings like natural gut in the mains at lowish tension, and put a low friction cross in. It's easy to displace those mains in that setup. That's a totally different animal than a stiff poly mains setup, and most anybody who has any kind of a low-to-high swing should be able to displace those mains. That's another benefit of it: Low friction (together with soft mains) also makes it easier to displace the mains! An added benefit is that this easy displacement will add tons to the comfort of the setup.

Gut/poly is for everybody, poly mains only for 4.5+ hard hitters.
 

Irvin

Talk Tennis Guru
Agassi disagrees... He should be the leading authority when it comes to playing with Kevlar setup.
Agassi never played with a Kevlar setup. He used ProBlend (Kevlar/SG) and Kevlar/Gut. He switched to ALU because he said he got more spin. I doubt most people will feel that way.
 

SpinToWin

Talk Tennis Guru
Agassi never played with a Kevlar setup. He used ProBlend (Kevlar/SG) and Kevlar/Gut. He switched to ALU because he said he got more spin. I doubt most people will feel that way.
I don't wanna know who these "most people" are.
 

kingcheetah

Hall of Fame
But now realize this: You need TONS of racquet head speed to displace stiff poly mains. Most of the rec players don't have that, and shouldn't use poly mains. BUT, put soft elastic strings like natural gut in the mains at lowish tension, and put a low friction cross in. It's easy to displace those mains in that setup. That's a totally different animal than a stiff poly mains setup, and most anybody who has any kind of a low-to-high swing should be able to displace those mains. That's another benefit of it: Low friction (together with soft mains) also makes it easier to displace the mains! An added benefit is that this easy displacement will add tons to the comfort of the setup.

Gut/poly is for everybody, poly mains only for 4.5+ hard hitters.
Now this I can agree with.
 
Correlation is not causation. Snapback comes AFTER the ball leaves the stringbed, so it cannot be the cause of spin. It is though symptom, sign of, epiphenomenal with bigger spin.
Snapback happens during contact. Dumb myth number 838178: BUSTED
You're both wrong. :) There was a TWU article where they tested different string patterns and different string tensions. On normal cases the snapback does indeed happen during contact. But there was an open pattern case with a low tension where the strings were displaced so much and snapped back so slowly that the snapback IN THAT CASE occured after the ball contact. Guess what: This late snapback case gave by far the least spin!

Anybody care to find that link for me? I couldn't find that now...
 

LeeD

Bionic Poster
Torpantennis, you neglect SOFT string jobs!
Lower tensions, anyone can move STBite16, even old farts.
Higher tensions, you are correct.
I use 35 on 100 squ in rackets, add 5 for 105's.
 

Rabbit

G.O.A.T.
Agassi never played with a Kevlar setup. He used ProBlend (Kevlar/SG) and Kevlar/Gut. He switched to ALU because he said he got more spin. I doubt most people will feel that way.
Isn't using Problend and/or Kevlar/Natural Gut deemed a "kevlar setup"?

I don't wanna know who these "most people" are.
I'm with you.

To the OP, with regard to snap back, if it does contribute, I don't think it's anything major. I think your technique accounts for 80% of spin, the racquet and string pattern 15% and the string 5%. That said, I have experienced some strings, like Ashaway's that weren't spin friendly and I found it to be true. (Oh, and these percentages are educated guesses.)
 
Last edited:

Imago

Hall of Fame
Most of the spin-friendly poly's of PP have this revealing characteristic:

"Kein Verrutschen der Saiten"

When there is no Verrutsch, how could there be Verrutsch Back? ;)

On the other hand, as mentioned before, for those of us who use Gut/Poly or Gut/Multi, after two hours of hitting, there is only snap (string deflection) without any snapback - so we have to flip the racket with every other hit.

As for the stringsavers, they may help the rough, NG, SG, profiled strings glide back, and bite themselves into the ball.
 

Automatix

Hall of Fame
Most of the spin-friendly poly's of PP have this revealing characteristic:

"Kein Verrutschen der Saiten"

When there is no Verrutsch, how could there be Verrutsch Back? ;)
I don't want to enter the whole snap back debate but you do know that these descriptions and views are outdated?

If we went back in time I can guarantee you that 99% would say that poly strings don't move while in fact (and this is something we all agree hence the multiple videos) they simply snap back into their original position. Heck I think many people even nowadays will say that certain strings "don't move".
 

v-verb

Hall of Fame
Poly string DO NOT produce the most spin. They are a close second though. Kevlar produces the most spin.

Using the old spaghetti pattern produced more spring because the string bed provided more friction. Spin and SnapBack were more pronounced because of the ball to string bed friction.

Saying SnapBack causes spin is like saying dents causes accidents. Because every time you have an accident in your car you end up with a dent. SnapBack does not occur until after the ball leaves the strings. If the ball is not spinning when it leaves the stringbed it will never spin unless it hits something else (like the court) that it deflects off of.
I hit with a fair bit of spin and have used extreme spin racquets including the Woodforde 12 x 16 racquets. I will say that I believe Irvin when he says that kevlar produces the most spin. I've used Ashaway kevlar+ and the spin I get from that string is unreal - lots or weird jumps and kicks that I usually don't get with other strings
 

deaner2211

Semi-Pro
Yes, it is true that technique trumps all. It is however also true that strings with free string movement and thus good snapback allow an easier access to spin (along with a higher launch angle). Some will benefit from this, others won't. In the end, it's the player and his game that matters (determines which setup suits him) regardless of what results labs predict.

You won't find many people saying they use syn gut for the spin advantages though. That's found with setups that exhibit the characteristics you mention here, most notably full poly.
Actually I do get more spin with natural gut than I do with a full bed of poly (especially on the kick serve). Not much more but enough for my hitting partner to notice. I believe spin is dictated more by swing speed, grip, and swing path rather than strings or snapback.
 

kingcheetah

Hall of Fame
I'm amused this came back up. TW's lab isn't going to lie, but I do still think that people refer to "snapback" as something they detect, which frequently isn't the case. Are there strings that are spin-friendly? Sure. But people aren't actively feeling the snapback in a noticeable way.
 

Shroud

G.O.A.T.
Actually I do get more spin with natural gut than I do with a full bed of poly (especially on the kick serve). Not much more but enough for my hitting partner to notice. I believe spin is dictated more by swing speed, grip, and swing path rather than strings or snapback.
Ok, then does your swing change on gut???
 

Shroud

G.O.A.T.
I'm amused this came back up. TW's lab isn't going to lie, but I do still think that people refer to "snapback" as something they detect, which frequently isn't the case. Are there strings that are spin-friendly? Sure. But people aren't actively feeling the snapback in a noticeable way.
its noticeable in launch angle which leads to higher trajectory and the illusion of spin...
 

Shroud

G.O.A.T.
Nope same swing. Even when I use a hybrid ( Gut mains and poly crosses) I have more spin than a full bed of poly.
Right. That undercuts the "its the swing path and RHS" argument...there IS something to the snapback deal and because gut is one of the most elastic strings it snapsback the most....
 

BlueB

Legend
Actually I do get more spin with natural gut than I do with a full bed of poly (especially on the kick serve). Not much more but enough for my hitting partner to notice. I believe spin is dictated more by swing speed, grip, and swing path rather than strings or snapback.
I get the most spin with full poly. Gut/poly is in 2nd place. I stick to the gut/poly for comfort. Full poly seems to snapback better as the strings are mostly straight. On gut/poly they sometimes stay displaced.
All other combos feel like crap, except maybe a fresh bed of syn gut, for about an hour or two.
Never played with Kevlar, though.

Sent from my SM-G965W using Tapatalk
 

jmacdaununder2

Hall of Fame
When you say 'try it' do you mean doing Jenna with prestretch and 20lb differential - always good to warm up before exercise but from what I've seen I weigh a lot more than 20lbs more than she does; no doubt she's retired now anyway?
 

deaner2211

Semi-Pro
Right. That undercuts the "its the swing path and RHS" argument...there IS something to the snapback deal and because gut is one of the most elastic strings it snapsback the most....
How is that when snapback is caused by the main strings sliding back into place by the crosses. Uncoated natural gut does stretches more during ball contact but they dont snapback into place because I have to straighten them sometimes. When I use a gut hybrid then they dont move as much. You say gut snapback more while other say poly snapback more so which is it?
 

mikeler

Moderator
I notice less spin with natural gut than full poly but definitely more power especially on my serve. Snapback data is out there and is a real thing but I think the effect of it overall is relatively small.
 

Sander001

Hall of Fame
I'm amused this came back up. TW's lab isn't going to lie, but I do still think that people refer to "snapback" as something they detect, which frequently isn't the case. Are there strings that are spin-friendly? Sure. But people aren't actively feeling the snapback in a noticeable way.
True but when strings have less friction and especially when I'm going for spin, it feels much more comfortable :)
 

Shroud

G.O.A.T.
How is that when snapback is caused by the main strings sliding back into place by the crosses. Uncoated natural gut does stretches more during ball contact but they dont snapback into place because I have to straighten them sometimes. When I use a gut hybrid then they dont move as much. You say gut snapback more while other say poly snapback more so which is it?
gut/poly snaps back the most IMHO and I think there is some data on that somewhere.
 

Muppet

Legend
The strings that snap back the best are the ones with the most slippery and durable coatings. When a string is also less elastic that helps too. It's more important that the cross string is slippery, but having both strings slippery is great for spin and comfort. Having some texture on the cross string will increase feel, while all slippery strings feel muted. So it's a trade-off.
 
Top