Some questions about the "Yonex Loop."

[JetFlyr]

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?

 

[Irvin]

I have used it to finish crosses it the result means my tit off is closer to the clamp and there are no issues created. If your main tie off ends up on the last main it is definitely a no no. If you double block a hole don't do it. This is a technique I use sometimes but not too often. When in doubt don't.

 

[kkm]

The Wilson team uses it in a way on the crosses - to finish the crosses they go from the cross 3rd from the bottom to the last cross before going to the second-to-last cross.

 

[kkm]

I think some Yonex stringers and stringers they know from also stringing on other teams use the Yonex loop.

 

[uk_skippy]

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?

In short, it's used by a lot of stringers (that I deal with) on the tour. I use it, and its used in the teams I'm in.

• Is there a concern about the blocked holes it creates and how is this dealt with?

Not really. I'd have to look at a rqt by rqt basis to see if there's an issue, but the only issue (and there's a general issue about this rqt) is on the proper Burn rqt

• I've only used it on the mains. Is it practical to use when finishing (or starting, for that matter) crosses?

As KKM as mentioned, it could used on crosses at the bottom, but generally its not used on crosses

Hope that helps

 

[spectrum]

Is this the same as the box pattern that some prince and ektelon rackets use?

 

[Irvin]

 

[am1899]

Is this the same as the box pattern that some prince and ektelon rackets use?

The Yonex loop is not the same as a box pattern.

 

[chrisingrassia]

A 22-main racquet?

 

[kkm]

A 22-main racquet?

Badminton.

 

[Rabbit]

I have gotten to the point I use it as often as possible to shorten the tie off on mains.

 

[chrisingrassia]

I have gotten to the point I use it as often as possible to shorten the tie off on mains.

Totally. It certainly makes perfect sense AFAIC

 

[am1899]

To continue to the conversation, for those of you who use the Yonex loop regularly AND increase tension on the tie off's...do you increase tension on the final 2 strings (like Parnell does in his video), or just the last string before tying off? Just curious...

 

[chrisingrassia]

To continue to the conversation, for those of you who use the Yonex loop regularly AND increase tension on the tie off's...do you increase tension on the final 2 strings (like Parnell does in his video), or just the last string before tying off? Just curious...

I still struggle with watching him do that in the video. 25% of his mains are then tensioned incorrectly

 

[am1899]

I still struggle with watching him do that in the video. 25% of his mains are then tensioned incorrectly

Yeah, Parnell's approach is rather...shall i say interesting. Curious to know what others do as well.

 

[chrisingrassia]

Yeah, Parnell's approach is rather...shall i say interesting. Curious to know what others do as well.

if these boards have taught me anything at all it's that there's more than one way to skin a cat.

 

[JetFlyr]

I have my Baiardo set to add 20% on the last pull only, which frequently ends up being the second-to-last mains when I'm using the Yonex Loop. Sometimes when doing the crosses, I will pull the extra 20% on the last two crosses--especially in a dense pattern or an ATW pattern.

I don't believe there's one "right" way. Just be consistent and produce repeatable string jobs.

 

[Cobra Tennis]

Yeah, Parnell's approach is rather...shall i say interesting. Curious to know what others do as well.

Well, if there is one guy who I would trust, it's Richard Parnell.

 

[MathieuR]

I still struggle with watching him do that in the video. 25% of his mains are then tensioned incorrectly

But he evens out that "extra tension" by transferring that by bending the strings side-ways after tie-off

 

[am1899]

Well, if there is one guy who I would trust, it's Richard Parnell.

No argument here. I have a great deal of respect for Richard.

To be clear, I wasn't attempting to suggest what Richard does in this context is right or wrong (I don't pretend to have the authority to do so anyway). His procedure here is interesting to me, for one, because it is different from what I do. Which in some way comes back to, as @chrisingrassia said...there's more than one way to skin a cat.

 

[MathieuR]

But he evens out that "extra tension" by transferring that by bending the strings side-ways after tie-off

With or without Yonex- loop, with or without extra knot-tension, with or without tension-transfer, that gives already 8 variations, and that only for the mains (in 2 piece stringing).

edit: I am again and again surprised on the lack of reactions on these, in my opinion, "decisive" choices that a stringer takes for "his interpretation" of a good string-job. Yes, I know there are many ways to skin a cat, and that "consistency" is key. But on the other hand, when a player brings his racquet to a stringer, and says: I want string XX, with YYkg, can he expect a "predictable" string-job? ( and then we are not even taking into the equation the different tensioning-mechanisms/tensioning-time-before-clamping/....)

 

[MathieuR]

BUMP

I would love to read some reactions

 

[kkm]

Overall probably not. There are some players who specify how they want things done. Tommy Haas is one of them, says where he wants the tieoffs.

It's been written here that Nadal's racquets have been strung every which way.

 

[Irvin]

Just strung up a Dunlop 200 200 Tour (16x18, skip 7&9 head 8 throat and mains start at head. Customer wanted 1 piece and I decided to use the Yonex loop on the short and long sides. On the short side I used the tail to run in crosses 2 and 1, tensioned the second cross and held it with a starting clamp. On the long side I ran crosses 3-18 and tied off. Because the top cross was held with a starting clamp both clamps were free to hold the bottom cross. I place one clamp at near the frame as I could and the opposite clamp as close to the first as I could. When I removed the tension there was little or no drawback I could see. After tying off there was also no drawback when the clamps were released. Use the same process to tie off the top cross. I did not use the knot function with pulling any strings, reference tension only, and did not 'tune' the outer mains.

The only objection I have using the method I used is you end up with three string crossing on the outer loop between the top two crosses on one side. I just does not look as neat. I could have tied off the short side but then I would not have had what I consider a balanced racket.

 

[MathieuR]

Thanks Irvin, detailed description.
But could you elucidate why you chose
Yonex-loop/no extra knot-tension/no tension transfer between the mains.
Or is it "ad random"

 

[chrisingrassia]

But he evens out that "extra tension" by transferring that by bending the strings side-ways after tie-off

With or without Yonex- loop, with or without extra knot-tension, with or without tension-transfer, that gives already 8 variations, and that only for the mains (in 2 piece stringing).

edit: I am again and again surprised on the lack of reactions on these, in my opinion, "decisive" choices that a stringer takes for "his interpretation" of a good string-job. Yes, I know there are many ways to skin a cat, and that "consistency" is key. But on the other hand, when a player brings his racquet to a stringer, and says: I want string XX, with YYkg, can he expect a "predictable" string-job? ( and then we are not even taking into the equation the different tensioning-mechanisms/tensioning-time-before-clamping/....)

I don't really even understand what your question is here. Plus, you responded to your own comment, so I'm lost.

 

[Irvin]

Thanks Irvin, detailed description.
But could you elucidate why you chose
Yonex-loop/no extra knot-tension/no tension transfer between the mains.
Or is it "ad random"

I wanted to use the short side to run in at least the top cross string so I would not be tying off the outer main giving me an un-balanced frame. The distance between the 7th main and the second cross grommets is greater than the distance from the 8 main to the second cross, and the long section of string from the outer main to the top cross I thought would offer a lot of friction so I would have a looser outer main on the short side. To get rid of the long section between the 8th main and top cross I decided to use the Yonex loop and run it the top two crosses with the short side. Tying off the top cross at 6H is very short so there is less untensioned string between the clamp and the knot making for reduced drawback.

EDIT: Had the customer not requested one piece I would have preferred to string the racket two piece with no Yonex loop.

 

[MathieuR]

I don't really even understand what your question is here. Plus, you responded to your own comment, so I'm lost.

Everyone is turning a blind eye to the "tension-transfer" Parnell is using after tie-off. How come?
And pointing out the "8 variations": I'm curious to hear why someone makes a specific choice.

 

[chrisingrassia]

Everyone is turning a blind eye to the "tension-transfer" Parnell is using after tie-off. How come?
And pointing out the "8 variations": I'm curious to hear why someone makes a specific choice.

Is that a legitimate/reasonable/verifiable /accurate method for getting reference tension, just pulling on a main by hand? Pretty much completely defeats the point of him using a $5000 machine AFAIC.

A specific choice of what? I'm not following.

 

[Irvin]

Everyone is turning a blind eye to the "tension-transfer" Parnell is using after tie-off. How come?
And pointing out the "8 variations": I'm curious to hear why someone makes a specific choice.

If someone chooses to use a Yonex loop, raise tension on tie off strings or balance tension by picking the string I don't care. I choose not to increase tension on tie off strings because I feel like I'm loosing control. If I use the tension head to pull the same tension on all strings and do what I can to reduce drawback I think I'm better off.picking thre strings of unequal length is not going to equalize tension. If anything it will ensure they are not the same.

Not trying to say my way is better it just gives me more pace of mind. If Richard likes his method better (and my guess is he does) then by all means he should use it.

 

[MathieuR]

A specific choice of what? I'm not following

Well, you can lead a horse to water........

 

[MathieuR]

for getting reference tension,

Every stringer gets a different result using "same" reference tension.

 

[Cobra Tennis]

LOL---you guys crack me up.

You realize Richard Parnell is stringing for the top players in the word, right?-----And not your 3.0 lady down the street?

 

[Rabbit]

LOL---you guys crack me up.

You realize Richard Parnell is stringing for the top players in the word, right?-----And not your 3.0 lady down the street?

Amen. No wonder the real pros don't post here much.

 

[MathieuR]

Double

 

[MathieuR]

Amen. No wonder the real pros don't post here much.

Yeah, that's a pity. Would help though if not only the specific technique is shown, but also the "reason why" (pro's and cons for the choices made).

Maybe a good idea to have a sticky where "all" stringing-techniques are summurized and discussed.
Edit: shame on me; that thread is already operational. Just needs updates to this discussions.

 

[kkm]

LOL---you guys crack me up.

You realize Richard Parnell is stringing for the top players in the word, right?-----And not your 3.0 lady down the street?

I guess he strings for top professionals and 3.0 ladies down the street.

 

[kkm]

LOL---you guys crack me up.

You realize Richard Parnell is stringing for the top players in the word, right?-----And not your 3.0 lady down the street?

I guess he strings for top professionals and 3.0 ladies down the street.

 

[Rabbit]

If someone chooses to use a Yonex loop, raise tension on tie off strings or balance tension by picking the string I don't care. I choose not to increase tension on tie off strings because I feel like I'm loosing control. If I use the tension head to pull the same tension on all strings and do what I can to reduce drawback I think I'm better off.picking thre strings of unequal length is not going to equalize tension. If anything it will ensure they are not the same.

How exactly are you losing control? Don't you use the knot button on your Star 5? Doesn't that increase tension? If not, why wouldn't you use the knot button?

Not trying to say my way is better it just gives me more pace of mind. If Richard likes his method better (and my guess is he does) then by all means he should use it.

Well, I'm once he gets through stringing at Wimbledon and any follow on tournaments for the ATP/WTA and has time to peruse the boards, Richard will review your technique and his and make a determination as to which is more consistent and produces a better product. I'm sure it will be a tough decision for him.

 

[Irvin]

How exactly are you losing control? Don't you use the knot button on your Star 5? Doesn't that increase tension? If not, why wouldn't you use the knot button?

When you pull tension on a string you're stretching the string. More often than not when you tie off a string you will have some drawback. When R Parnell tied off the mains with the Yonex loop there was quite a bit of drawback. When you use a Yonex loop you shortening the distance between the clamp and the tie off knot cutting back on some of your drawback. When you increase tension on tie off strings you're stretching the string more. Whether or not that extra stretch accounted for all the stretch you lost from drawback or not is completely out of your control. Maybe it does maybe it didn't.

Granted the stringers at Wimbledon are better than me. R Parnell may / may not use the method he described at Wimbledon. But one thing is for sure (just my guess) unless the stringer receives special instructions from the player, all similar rackets are strung by all stringers. So they either all use that method or they all don't. If the stringers all choose the methods they preferred consistency fron one stringer to the next goes out the window. When a player goes around from tournament to tournament and has different stringer and stringing machine they end up with different feeling rackets. I think that one of the reasons many of the top pro players use other professional stringers rather than the official tournament stringers.

 

[Irvin]

Richard will review your technique and his and make a determination as to which is more consistent and produces a better product.

I doubt that very seriously, but if he does I would be very interested interested in what he has to say.

 

[Irvin]

Deleted post

 

[MathieuR]

If the stringers all choose the methods they preferred, consistency from one stringer to the next goes out the window

I think that every stringer will get a "unique" result, even if he uses same string/kg's/stringing-machine/method (although the results between pro-stringers will be minimal)

@Rabbit : Is there a site/document/book where Richard describes his specific working-methods?

 

[Rabbit]

When you pull tension on a string you're stretching the string. More often than not when you tie off a string you will have some drawback. When R Parnell tied off the mains with the Yonex loop there was quite a bit of drawback. When you use a Yonex loop you shortening the distance between the clamp and the tie off knot cutting back on some of your drawback. When you increase tension on tie off strings you're stretching the string more. Whether or not that extra stretch accounted for all the stretch you lost from drawback or not is completely out of your control. Maybe it does maybe it didn't.

IMO/IME you're overthinking this. Compensating for tension loss on a tie off is better than not doing so, I think everyone would agree with that. Figuring string stretch and equating that with loss of control is a bit of a stretch; pun intended.

Granted the stringers at Wimbledon are better than me. R Parnell may / may not use the method he described at Wimbledon. But one thing is for sure (just my guess) unless the stringer receives special instructions from the player, all similar rackets are strung by all stringers. So they either all use that method or they all don't. If the stringers all choose the methods they preferred consistency fron one stringer to the next goes out the window. When a player goes around from tournament to tournament and has different stringer and stringing machine they end up with different feeling rackets. I think that one of the reasons many of the top pro players use other professional stringers rather than the official tournament stringers.

I believe in one of the videos it was mentioned that a stringer is assigned a pro for the tournament. Of course, that's not to say that a stringer has only one player. Parnell mentioned in his interview that certain players request him. It's been my experience that players will request a stringer while others don't really care. I can assure you that Wimbledon and other big pro tournaments have consistency from the stringing room accounted for.

 

[Rabbit]

I doubt that very seriously, but if he does I would be very interested interested in what he has to say.

I was being facetious.

 

[MathieuR]

Compensating for tension loss on a tie off is better than not doing so, I think everyone would agree with that.

As the outer mains are (much) shorter then the middle ones, they can have less tension, and still contribute same as the others to the SBS. (for the crosses same).
Using the Stringlab2 you can measure SBS on many places in the stringbed, and then actually see the difference when using yes/no extra knot-tension

edit1: the guidelines of the USRSA also tell us NOT to use extra knot-tension
edit2: to try to get a more homogeneous SBS, I tension the top 2 crosses "minus 4 kg", and the next two "minus 2 kg" compared with reference tension; and the last 2 also "minus 2kg".

 

[JetFlyr]

edit1: the guidelines of the USRSA also tell us NOT to use extra knot-tension

Keep in mind that USRSA guidelines were developed to provide uniform guidelines across all available stringing machines, whether Bairdos, Sensors, Star 5's, or Klippermates. It is tedious and time-consuming to increase tension for tie-off's on drop-weight and crank machines. There is a reason that manufacturers of high-end electronic constant-pull machines added a "knot-tension" feature. There is a reason that professional tournament stringers use it.

 

[MathieuR]

There is a reason that manufacturers of high-end electronic constant-pull machines added a "knot-tension" feature. There is a reason that professional tournament stringers use it.

Well, I would like to hear that reason

I never use an extra "knot-tension". But I do transfer tension between the 3-4 outer-mains after tie-off.
Could it be that it's done, because:
- people are to lazy/lack-technique to pull the slack manually.
- do it cause everybody does it
- they forget that the outer mains are (much) shorter, and therefore should have less tension to come closer to a uniform SBS

 

[MathieuR]

Keep in mind that USRSA guidelines were developed to provide uniform guidelines across all available stringing machines, whether Bairdos, Sensors, Star 5's, or Klippermates.

Here is the elucidation from the USRSA:

" Many stringers feel it necessary to increase tension on outer mains
or crosses to compensate for tension lost during tie-offs. The USRSA
does not recommend this procedure because shorter outside mains
don’t require as much pull-tension to be as tight as longer, center
mains. Some stringers also place an awl in the shared tie-off hole to
pull up the slack before tying a knot. Here again, the USRSA believes
this to be an unnecessary procedure that could damage the string if
not performed properly. In short, we suggest normal tensions on tieoffs,
which may result in some tension loss on the outermost main
(or cross). If customers complain about this string being too loose,
you can explain that these strings are far away from the racquet’s
sweetspot. Also, mis-hits will actually be less jarring if outer mains
are not tensioned as high as the center mains. Stringers who are
intent on increasing tension on tie-offs should not go higher than 5
pounds above normal tension."
​

The USRSA also says nothing about tension-transfer between the mains; so, I can't say I follow the guidelines to the letter.

 

[MathieuR]

Bump