Some questions about the "Yonex Loop."

[chrisingrassia]

Bump

I feel like you're looking to start another argument/debate (which is what I seriously feel like every thread on here always becomes) over something that is an individual preference for each stringer.

As I read what you posted though, this is what I picked out: "The USRSA does not recommend this procedure".....and "Here again, the USRSA believes this to be an unnecessary procedure".

It's not a science.

Heck, even using the knot button isn't a science. It's just preference. My preference is to use it because there's clearly tension lost on a tie-off string. I just do 8% for everything, just be consistent with what you do frame-to-frame.

 

[Irvin]

Heck, even using the knot button isn't a science. It's just preference. My preference is to use it because there's clearly tension lost on a tie-off string. I just do 8% for everything, just be consistent with what you do frame-to-frame.

Why does everyone think there is tension lost when you tie off? I don't think that's true. First off if you want to limit drawback (tension loss) use one piece stringing instead of two and always tie off a top and bottom cross after the racket is strung. Very few rackets are compatable with the Yonex loop so more often than not it is not a good option. If you use two piece stringing you're only going to have three knots where there may be some loss of tension assuming you use a starting knot at the beginning of the crosses.

 

[MAX PLY]

While there may be some small amount tension lost, the effect upon the playability of the racquet is extremely insignificant. I believe the USRSA felt that most of the proposed "cures" were potentially more harmful than the perceived minor problem--prudent advice for most stringers. The "knot button" on a number of constant pull machines adds a small, and presumably very safe, amount of extra tension to accomodate a stringer's personal preference without risking additional damage. I have definitely seen more problems with stringers who do something extra on that last pull than I have seen in the "lost tension" infecting the sweet spot.

 

[chrisingrassia]

Why does everyone think there is tension lost when you tie off? I don't think that's true. First off if you want to limit drawback (tension loss) use one piece stringing instead of two and always tie off a top and bottom cross after the racket is strung. Very few rackets are compatable with the Yonex loop so more often than not it is not a good option. If you use two piece stringing you're only going to have three knots where there may be some loss of tension assuming you use a starting knot at the beginning of the crosses.

Like I said, not an exact science.

As for the red: agreed. Unless customer request for 4 knots, hybrid setup, or different M/X tensions.

While there may be some small amount tension lost, the effect upon the playability of the racquet is extremely insignificant.

Agree or disagree, not my role as a stringer to say something like this. My job is to make all the mains and crosses as close to reference tension that the customer wants.

 

[Rabbit]

While there may be some small amount tension lost, the effect upon the playability of the racquet is extremely insignificant.

Agree 100%

Agree or disagree, not my role as a stringer to say something like this.

Completely disagree. Your role as a stringer is to be the final arbiter of how the frame should be strung. It is then your role to determine the best means to do just that. It is not the player's concern to tell you how you should do that beyond general paramters; tension, knots.

My job is to make all the mains and crosses as close to reference tension that the customer wants.

You do realize the fallacy of this statement. You cannot approach reference tension.

 

[chrisingrassia]

Completely disagree. Your role as a stringer is to be the final arbiter of how the frame should be strung. It is then your role to determine the best means to do just that. It is not the player's concern to tell you how you should do that beyond general paramters; tension, knots.

I'm not disagreeing with being a technical advisor as to how the racquet should be strung. I'm saying it's not my place to say "meh, don't worry about it, it won't affect the playability" if I and/or a customer is concerned about tension loss on certain strings. Telling a customer to not worry about something is not my business motto if I'm making a subjective decision about tension loss.

How would you feel if you went to pick up your car from the garage and the mechanic says "meh, don't worry about that, it won't affect the way it drives/brakes/sounds"? I wouldn't be taking my car back there.

 

[MathieuR]

something that is an individual preference for each stringer.

I'm not fighting for my "personal preferences", I'm looking for methods to get the best possible stringjob done

Your role as a stringer is to be the final arbiter of how the frame should be strung. It is then your role to determine the best means to do just that.

Yes! I was stringing last weekend for a local tournament, and a player wanted his Babolat strike+ (18*20) strung with 26.5kg. I convinced him to 18.2kg mains/19.1kg crosses. He was 100% satisfied.

How would you feel if you went to pick up your car from the garage and the mechanic says "meh, don't worry about that, it won't affect the way it drives/brakes/sounds"?

If I trust the mechanic, and it saves me a few hundred, I would thank him for the advice, and stick with it.

 

[gmatheis]

Yes! I was stringing last weekend for a local tournament, and a player wanted his Babolat strike+ (18*20) strung with 26.5kg. I convinced him to 18.2kg mains/19.1kg crosses. He was 100% satisfied.

was this a hybrid string job?

If it's not and my stringer tried to insist that my mains should be looser than my crosses I think I'd just walk away.

 

[Hmgraphite1]

Th mains are straight when tensioned at say 50 lbs. With the weave off crosses using many different poly strings they will be more like 54 lbs when done. So stringing crosses at 52 lbs will result in a 54/52 string bed. With all the friction the crosses will likely really be 50 lbs. So final product is 54/50.
These are first round approx estimates. No need to walk away

 

[Irvin]

Th mains are straight when tensioned at say 50 lbs. With the weave off crosses using many different poly strings they will be more like 54 lbs when done. So stringing crosses at 52 lbs will result in a 54/52 string bed. With all the friction the crosses will likely really be 50 lbs. So final product is 54/50.
These are first round approx estimates. No need to walk away

I think I'm going to run away from this one as fast as I can. I have to modify my ignore list as soon as possible. So this is the last you'll hear from me because that's pure speculative BS.

 

[Hmgraphite1]

Sorry I ran calculations for mains based on the weaving knowing that the width of the string would cause an elongation in the main using the Pythagorean theorem and the data in string database for tensions at about 50 lbs. I will show my math when I do it again, it's scribbled on sheet somewhere. It didn't take into account the settling that occurs between the 50 to 54 stretch though, but the above effect is significant. The speculation is based of effects and I haven't seen a more accurate starting point. Ignoring it doesn't get a more accurate answer though. Sorry in advance if the answer has already been determined and I am trying to recreate the wheel starting with a square. Please link to answer.

 

[MathieuR]

was this a hybrid string job?

Yes, it was a hybrid. But I allways string 2piece.

With regard used tensions: they come from Stringway's TensionAdvisor, that tries to keep balance between the mains/crosses-forces on the frame (no headlength/width- change)

 

[Rabbit]

Sorry I ran calculations for mains based on the weaving knowing that the width of the string would cause an elongation in the main using the Pythagorean theorem and the data in string database for tensions at about 50 lbs. I will show my math when I do it again, it's scribbled on sheet somewhere. It didn't take into account the settling that occurs between the 50 to 54 stretch though, but the above effect is significant. The speculation is based of effects and I haven't seen a more accurate starting point. Ignoring it doesn't get a more accurate answer though. Sorry in advance if the answer has already been determined and I am trying to recreate the wheel starting with a square. Please link to answer.

if only they played tennis in a lab...

 

[am1899]

Sorry I ran calculations for mains based on the weaving knowing that the width of the string would cause an elongation in the main using the Pythagorean theorem and the data in string database for tensions at about 50 lbs. I will show my math when I do it again, it's scribbled on sheet somewhere. It didn't take into account the settling that occurs between the 50 to 54 stretch though, but the above effect is significant. The speculation is based of effects and I haven't seen a more accurate starting point. Ignoring it doesn't get a more accurate answer though. Sorry in advance if the answer has already been determined and I am trying to recreate the wheel starting with a square. Please link to answer.

Man, there’s so much meat on that bone...

 

[Hmgraphite1]

Guess I'm blocked for speculatin , ah shux, I'm sorey

 

[Steve Huff]

Irvin, is the Yonex Loop (a new term to me) used when the last tensioned cross will be tied off to another cross?

 

[am1899]

Steve - in the Yonex loop, when you have all the mains installed except the last 2, you skip the 2nd to last main, install the outside main first, then install the 2nd to last outside main last, then tie off.

Also used for crosses - for example, skip the 2nd to last cross, install the last cross, THEN the second to last cross, tie off.

 

[Irvin]

Irvin, is the Yonex Loop (a new term to me) used when the last tensioned cross will be tied off to another cross?

The Yonex loop is more for a main tie off but I guess you could call it a Yonex loop anytime you skip a main / cross and come back. I only use it on some rackets and always on mains.

 

[10shoe]

Yes, it was a hybrid. But I allways string 2piece.

With regard used tensions: they come from Stringway's TensionAdvisor, that tries to keep balance between the mains/crosses-forces on the frame (no headlength/width- change)

Well, I don't have any problem with the idea of stringing crosses tighter than mains (it makes more sense than the opposite). I also don't have any problem telling customers their tension requests are excessive (because I'm a slow learner). But be advised that in another thread the owner of Stringway appears to be advising owners of eCP machines to drop tension 4 lbs on the crosses. So you can now throw your Stringway Tension Advisor out.

Edit: Oopsy. I just noticed in the fine print you have a Stringway machine. Hope you were using it at that tournament.

 

[10shoe]

Regarding the Yonex loop (cuz I don't want to derail every thread I post in)... in a badminton racquet you would end up with a really long tie off if you didn't use the loop. Additionally, on a badminton racquet it is really not viable to enlarge a grommet with an awl. Plus any hole you might use is already a shared hole to begin with. On a tennis racquet, if you want to tie off on 7T and the mfr made 6T a larger grommet, enlarging 7T with a waxed awl is frequently an easy operation.

The only tennis racquet I have ever felt the need to double back on the mains is the Youtek Speed Pro with the multi piece grommet set that tends to lift up at the head without the extra looping.

 

[Steve Huff]

Actually, I may have used it on a badminton racket and not known it by any particular name.

 

[McLovin]

I have used this method whenever possible on the mains (meaning whenever it will shorten the distance to my tie-off) ever since @Irvin mentioned it in a post years ago.

I will use it on the crosses occasionally, but will normally have to increase the tension on the last pull by 20% due to it being a hard-pull.

 

[Rabbit]

Stringing my frame, the Volkl VS-10 Tour, I use the Yonex loop on the mains and crosses (I use a hybrid). It does shorten the tie off and on the mains allows for a better implementation of tie offs for a hybrid. On the bottom cross tie off, I do it to shorten the length.

 

[Irvin]

I will use it on the crosses occasionally, but will normally have to increase the tension on the last pull by 20% due to it being a hard-pull.

I know a lot of stringers suggest pulling hard weaves twice or at a higher tension. I don’t think it makes any difference.

 

[jim e]

I will use same technique on cross strings when I install a new bumper guard, as typically only one end of the bumpers end the string will pull down, so I skip one cross and then go back on the next one and that will hold down both ends of the bumper, as with this way the outside loop holds down both ends of the guard. Just need to do that on the 1st stringing of a new bumper and only when it looks like the end will not lay flat against the racquet.

 

[Irvin]

Just this morning I am stringing a Wilson Burn that skips 7&9H and normally the top cross ties off at 5H. I'm stringing this frame with an ATW Pattern, so I ran in the short side first 5 mains, then the 7th, and last;y the 6th for the Yonex loop. This allows me to tie off the 6th main (in 6H) at 5H.

 

[1HBHfanatic]

I have used this method whenever possible on the mains (meaning whenever it will shorten the distance to my tie-off) ever since @Irvin mentioned it in a post years ago.

I will use it on the crosses occasionally, but will normally have to increase the tension on the last pull by 20% due to it being a hard-pull.

Im double pulling on these crosses..
mornal tension first to take slack, then adding the extra knot tension on second pull..

 

[1HBHfanatic]

I will use same technique on cross strings when I install a new bumper guard, as typically only one end of the bumpers end the string will pull down, so I skip one cross and then go back on the next one and that will hold down both ends of the bumper, as with this way the outside loop holds down both ends of the guard. Just need to do that on the 1st stringing of a new bumper and only when it looks like the end will not lay flat against the racquet.

Know what you mean,, the flared out bumper ends bugged me all the time, until I figured it out..

 

[teekaywhy]

Did the loop on my SV98. I can see the benefit of the last cross being much shorter to the tie off, presumably with less tension loss as well for the knot. Doesn't seem to have any impact performance wise but for the detail oriented, it could b appealing.

 

[1HBHfanatic]

Yonex loop, Def. Not for every raket
ive run into several rakets that cant or should not be used in.
double blocked holes situations is one
Same tie off mains, is another..
use the yonex loop whenever its combinient for that raket..

 

[Steve Huff]

Unless I'm doing a hybrid, I almost always string the top cross with the short side. Sometimes, I'll string the top 3 crosses with the short side.

 

[Rabbit]

Unless I'm doing a hybrid, I almost always string the top cross with the short side. Sometimes, I'll string the top 3 crosses with the short side.

Me too and not almost always....always!

 

[krisdrum]

Been following this with some interest, except I have a flying clamp machine, and am scratching my head a bit around how I would do a yonex loop. Skipping M7 to weave M8 doesn't seem to be a good approach with flying clamps, as I'd have to either clamp M8 to M6 (too big a gap to jump) or string M8 and M7 and only tension M7 (and try to equalize tension differences as best I could manually). Unless someone sees another approach. So is the yonex loop approach really only a good option for fixed clamp machines?

 

[Wes]

So is the yonex loop approach really only a good option for fixed clamp machines?

IMO, yes, you're correct.
Whatever (perceived) benefits of employing the Yonex Loop would surely be lost, due to the amount of deflection/drawback that will occur using flying clamps.

IMHO... overall, I don't think there's much benefit in using the Yonex Loop, in general, on tennis racquets (despite having machines that DO have fixed clamps).
Yes, I have utilized it, on a few occasions, but those are certainly rare exceptions & weren't for the purpose of getting closer to the tie-off grommet.

 

[Irvin]

So is the yonex loop approach really only a good option for fixed clamp machines?

Actually the Yonex loop (I think) is used in the JET method of stringing and they suggest using the Stringway triple flying clamps.

 

[SavvyStringer]

I'd like to start a discussion about the so-called Yonex Loop, so I'll start by asking a few questions. This post only applies as it pertains to tennis racquets, not badminton racquets.

• Is it used on the tour by the main stringing teams?
• Is there a concern about the blocked holes it creates and how is this dealt with?
• I've only used it on the mains. Is it practical to use when finishing (or starting, for that matter) crosses?

If you want to see it on the mains I posted a video of a vcore dual g on my instagram @dterry34. I usually use it to finish my crosses but it doesn't work well on certain rackets unless you pre-stretch the grommet prior to putting string through. For instance it doesn't work well on a vcore dual g unless you stretch the grommet before hand. It really depends on the racket. I use it one Dr 98s.