String bed stiffness vs. string tension
- Thread starter verbouge
- Start date
I agree, Clintspin. It seems like a fairly simple thing to do, yet neither Stringway nor anybody else seems to want to fill in the blanks on that spread sheet. I mean, this would be a great project for a high school kid! It's simple to do the measurements, however. I'm just not sure what to do with the info.
The thing is, if string bed stiffness combined with string characteristics were the core things determining the type of string job going into a racket, one would think that manufacturers would be more inclined to include more info about their strings in their packaging. Technatic may be right: this may belong in another thread. However, it's integral to the subject of this thread. Maybe this weekend I'll start another thread.
As an aside, this conversation seems to have gone well in "Machines" as opposed to "Strings and stringing". Thoughtful crowd over here.
Dave
Technatic
Professional
Qualification of strings
Hee Guys,
I would like to throw a ball, concerning the qualification of strings:
The item of getting more info about strings is a heavy issue WITH AND WITHOUT using the Stringway system.
Every stringer needs to know which string for whom!
And I agree fully that it would be good to make a table in which all the strings that are used today are classified, so that stringers know how to choose their strings.
The problem for manufacturers is that many well known strings and good selling strings will appear to be bad strings.
So quite some string suppliers will not be very happy when the specs of their strings are “published”. The strings at the bottom of this table are strings which are sold in the market but their elongation quality is very very bad:
So how to solve this problem??
And concerning Stringway: They do not sell strings anymore so it is not in their interest to publish specifications of strings of other suppliers.
Resuming:
I agree upon the need to get a database.
The question is: how do we arrange this?
Hee Guys,
I would like to throw a ball, concerning the qualification of strings:
The item of getting more info about strings is a heavy issue WITH AND WITHOUT using the Stringway system.
Every stringer needs to know which string for whom!
And I agree fully that it would be good to make a table in which all the strings that are used today are classified, so that stringers know how to choose their strings.
The problem for manufacturers is that many well known strings and good selling strings will appear to be bad strings.
So quite some string suppliers will not be very happy when the specs of their strings are “published”. The strings at the bottom of this table are strings which are sold in the market but their elongation quality is very very bad:
So how to solve this problem??
And concerning Stringway: They do not sell strings anymore so it is not in their interest to publish specifications of strings of other suppliers.
Resuming:
I agree upon the need to get a database.
The question is: how do we arrange this?
Hi y'Aussie,
I don't mind giving an opinion on all this, but I'm not JayCee's spokesman, so I prefer not to get too involved in this discussion concerning him.
IMHO I think that you are missing an essential point in JayCee's objectives in his stringing method which is based on the aim of minimzing the difference between the "set tension on the tensioner" and the "true tension in the string-bed" of course this can only be controlled by using one or more devices that can give a reasonably accurate (or at least constant) means to measure the tension in the stringbed.
Despite frequent criticism of the consistency of results using a Stringmeter*, JayCee (and I as well) is convinced that the main string tension readings (string by string) are within a 5% accurracy range, and this is largely sufficient to determine :
- how well you are stringing,
- how constant your results are,
- how much tension is really lost bstween the set tension and the string-bed tension.
If you are capable of stringing well enough to get the same tension in the stringbed as the set tension on the machine, then you should be able to lower the set tension by at least 4-8lbs. This is the real goal, string better, minimize the tension loss when stringing, this permits you to lower the set tension.
Aussie, you say that when you apply JayCee's method, the stringbed is too tight, great, you have lmanaged to improve you stringing efficiency, but if you don't lower the set tension, then you are defeating the purpose of applying this method . . . By lowering the tension in the crosses, you are off-setting the stiffness of the stringbed, but messed up the rest.
There is a reason in JayCee's madness, this guy is a string conceptor, he develops the monos that we are playing with, but for years he has been telling everyone that wants to listen to him that monofilament string have very little elasticity, generally less than 1%, never more than 2%.
If you stretch the monos more that 2% then they don't come back into place. They become permantently over-stretched, they die. A dead mono has no power, will lose tension very quickly, can cause shoulder injuries.
If you string a racquet at 60lbs (average set tension mains/crosses) and you get a stringmeter readout on the mains of less than 58lbs, then your strings have been over-streched, they will not play as well as they were conceived to do, you are wasting your time and your money on mono-filament strings.
You have 3 options :
1. You are capable of believing that the stringmeter gives an accurate estimation of the tension on the main-strings. If the difference is more than 2lbs less than the tension that was set on the tensioner, and if you are willing to try to improve your stringing method to minimize this loss of tension when stringing, then JayCee's method is well worth looking at very closely. It is the key to remarkable improvement in stringing efficiency . . .
2. You can't believe that the results obtained when measuring the tension strung on the mains with a Stringmeter could possibly be true, the differences are far too important. Don't change anything, with a lock-out or an electric machine the differences can be more than 12lbs, nobody could believe this little tool could be correct, so just eliminate the problem at the source, go bak to synthetic gut strings, they have enough elasticity to overcome over-stretch problems, these are really forgiving strings.
3. You really appreciate the longer life and better control at lower tensions when you put a poly in the mains and a syngut in the crosses, then this a reasonable compromise. The dead poly in the mains will limt just how far the ball will go into the stringbed, the syngut in the crosses will not be pushed back further than the poly will let it, so the syngut will hold tension better and give lots of punch to the ball. You don't have to improve your stringing habits, the results are quite good all round, and lastly but not leastly it can be quite cheap. What more do you want, hybrids can be great.
This just about covers the limits of my experience, it's not that extensive, but it could give a few of you something to think about. Today I rarely string a racquet at more than 50lbs (I only use mono-filaments) my usual ranges of tension are :
- from 40 to 44lbs for a mid+ 18/20 GA18
- from 44 to 48lbs for a mid+ 16/19 GA17
But I do have a lot of very good players who I string for at 36-40lbs even in a 16/19 string pattern. Once a player gets used to lower tensions, it's almost impossible to raise them again.
Your thoughts ?
Cheers,
James
* There are other means to measure the average tension in the stringbed, but they vary a little depending on the technical characterisics of the device. The other means to control and compare results is to measure the string-bed stiffness, I personally use a StringLab and find it very useful, other dynamic or static SBS can give consistant and reliable measurements. Without a means to control either the average tension in the stringbed, and/or the SBS, it is impossible to know what you are really doing when you string a racquet.
Last edited:
onehandbh
G.O.A.T.
Am I correct to assume that then in the outer mains where you set a
higher tension you are "over-stretching" the this part of the stringbed
in order to make sure the middle part's set tension is the same as the
measured tension. And that you are in a sense sacrificing this little
used part of the stringbed and that you have to do this due to the
loss of tension from the tie-off? (same thing on the crosses)
I feel that not only should string makers have more information on their strings but also racquet makers. If it is a very good idea not to distort the frame-why don't racquet manufacturers show a tension range for the racquets with a side note to either lower or raise the cross-tension by a certain amount.
aussie
Professional
James, thanks for your input. As always, it is thoughtful and incisive. Your post has inspired me to revisit JayCee's methods and try a mono/sun gut hybrid at greatly reduced tensions. You quite rightly pointed out that I have achieved the desired aim of increased stringbed stiffness with a relatively high set stringing tension so now I aim to dial in a lower tension using the JayCee method hopefully giving the benefits of lower tension allied with a stiffer stringbed tension. The best of both worlds as it were! Thanks for the inspiration!
To whoever wrote that this forum tends to have the most thoughtful and educative posts, I couldn't agree more. I spend most of my time on TT here - if you want to read puerile drivel, spend some time on the Pro Match results and General Pro player discussion forums!!
To whoever wrote that this forum tends to have the most thoughtful and educative posts, I couldn't agree more. I spend most of my time on TT here - if you want to read puerile drivel, spend some time on the Pro Match results and General Pro player discussion forums!!
James, it appears that Jaycee used the stringway tension adviser tables and then incorporated his own technique of varying tensions on the outer mains, first 2 & last 3 cross. There is some discussion that he massages the stringbed to spread out the tension a bit but not sure when that is performed and how. Maybe you can elaborate.
It seems to make sense that we need to achieve the target of same stringbed tension and set tension on machine, I think Jaycee refers this as WYSIWYG (what you string if what you get). Once this is achieved can you start to lower tension by 4-8 lbs. I've read Jaycee stringing method and he uses flying clamps (triple & double), and on the last 2 mains he threads #9 first then 8 and double pulls after adding extra 4kg tension. Is this necessary for a machine with fixed clamps? I think this may be unique for flying clamps due to clamp twist at the tie off. I may be wrong, as I don't have experience with flying clamps.
I don't think I have the entire Jaycee method and the only info I have is from the link I provided in post #13 on page 1 of this thread. If someone can share more please fire away. Thanks!
It seems to make sense that we need to achieve the target of same stringbed tension and set tension on machine, I think Jaycee refers this as WYSIWYG (what you string if what you get). Once this is achieved can you start to lower tension by 4-8 lbs. I've read Jaycee stringing method and he uses flying clamps (triple & double), and on the last 2 mains he threads #9 first then 8 and double pulls after adding extra 4kg tension. Is this necessary for a machine with fixed clamps? I think this may be unique for flying clamps due to clamp twist at the tie off. I may be wrong, as I don't have experience with flying clamps.
I don't think I have the entire Jaycee method and the only info I have is from the link I provided in post #13 on page 1 of this thread. If someone can share more please fire away. Thanks!
Last edited:
I believe that I tie off knots as well as it can possibly be done. I use the same simple but very efficient knot that JayCee recommends (this is the same knot that the Wilson Pro Stringers Team has adopted), but despite utmost care when tying off it is easy to suffer a total loss of tension, especially on mono-filament strings, between 12 and 20lbs on the last 2 strings before the knot.
There are several reasons for this, but the most important sources of loss of tension are :
1. the very low eleasticity on a monofilament string : 1/16th inch of draw-back on the string can result in a loss of tension of 20lbs.
(the same draw-back on a syngut will be picked up by the elasticity of the string, total loss of tension would be about 4-6lbs)
2. If you string in 2 pieces (4 knots) this means that with a knot on each side of the mains you will lose an average of 16lbs on each of the string-bed, an average loss of 2lbs/main string right across the frame, but potentially significantly more in the center because by hitting the ball these center strings will become slacker than the rest. This causes loss of control, greater string movements, increased wear, but no real impovement in power but a real loss of efficiency.
3. The closer the knot to the clamp before ty-off, the less the loss of tension. Many string patterns will tie-off the 8th main on the 6th or the 9th on the 7th, it is far better to tie off on an adjacent main rather than skip one as above. If the tie-off is 2 main grommet holes from the last string, JayCee suggests stringing the mains as follows :
- 16/19 : from 6th to 8th > 7th > tie off on the 6th (+8lbs on last 2 pulls)
- 18/20 : from 7th to 9th > 8th > tie off on the 7th (+8lbs on last 2 pulls)
To answer your question : you are absolutely right, and now you know why. . .
Cheers,
James
Hello icorp,
These seem to be sound comments, you've certainly got the line of thinking right. The use of SW flying clamps combined with the appropriate method to finish the mains and crosses with the triple flying clamp has simply given the stringer the means to get a perfectly comparable result whether he uses any of the 3 clamping systems currently available on Stringway machines.
The recommended tensions are exactly the same whether you be using fixed clamps or flying clamps, the end result is also the same.
Ideally WYSIWYG is the objective, at the last GSS Symposium John demonstrated his method of stringing on several different machines, he achieved exactly what he announced on 4 successive stringjobs on 4 identical racquets, a very good stringer did almost as well on a Prince electronic machine with an average loss of 0,6lbs, and about 1lb average loss of tension 24 hours after stringing, simply by applying JayCee's method for the 1st time. Previously the average loss of tension was from 3 to 4lbs 24 hours after stringing in his usual way. The machine is not as important as the capacity of the stringer to do a good job.
For a stringer to change habits, to question his personal capacity to string well, it's not easy to get the message across. Unless you give it a try, you will never know if it works, the easiest way is to be able to check the average stringbed tension. Recently a very interesting iPhone application became available on AppStore : Racquettune
I use it regularly, you just need to find the right tool to hit the stringbed so that the sound is "crisp". The constant quality of the read-out depends on the efficiency of this tool. I get the best results with a fine metal file (about 6 inches long) with a wooden handle. Just hit the strings gently with the handle, bingo you can read the average tension in the stringbed. It took me some time to get it right, but now I couldn't be without it.
At only USD1,00 it's really a great deal.
Cheers,
James
Hey aussie,
That's my boy, I felt that you'd almost got it right, nice to see that you are on the track.
Keep us updated on the results.
Have a cold one on me,
Cheers,
James
Hi Clintspin,
Amen to that . . . :shock:
Let's just feel that marketing companies are not necessarily the manufacturers or even the concepters of their products. Ofter they are not really willing to become involved in the way their products can be successfully used by the players, this is where shops and coaches are supposed to give the correct advice to their clients.
The information given to the shops and coaches comes from the marketing companies, who have little or no contact with their suppliers, so it would be wishfull thinking to imagine that the right message gets to the right person.
There are 2 interesting concepters who have tried to communicate honestly with the membvers of this forum :
- Fred Timmer, owner, concepter and manufacturer of Stringway
- John Elliot, concepter of tennis racquet frames, monofilament tennis strings and developments for stringing machines and stringing methods
These 2 engineers have contributed more to the advancement in machines, strings and stringing methods than any other engineer in the tennis business. Both are more than 60 years old and their accumulated experiences are also more than 60 years.
Both of these men participated actively on TTTW to help advise "home stringers" and answer questions to the best of their abilities.
Both were considered to be "spamming".
Both have been personally "banned for life" from this board.
Several members of this board have questionned the real motivations for this ban, I also questionned it more than a year ago, but I never saw a reply to my question, nor a reply to those who have recently asked if it is possible to lift the ban on JayCee . . .
Can someone on the TTTW staff please take the time to clarify this subject.
Many thanks,
James
So many good points, so little forum time
This conversation is going exactly where I had hoped it would at the beginning. This stuff may appear to be dry and technical to most, but once you begin to take an earnest interest in stringing excellence, it becomes technical, but not dry at all. Very rich, indeed! I'm learning with every post, and looking stuff up and brainstorming over here in Oregon.
A few comments, questions, and ideas.
This database is useful, but still limited. It appears to be only based on string jobs done by others, and doesn't give the elasticity characteristics of the strings themselves.
I've had the same impression. My string beds feel stiffer using the pieces of JayCee's method I have so far. Is it really the goal, then, to lower overall tension once stringing efficiency has been achieved? It seems that JayCee has modified and perhaps improved upon the Stringway Tension Adviser, and perhaps there is a need for a modified TA table based on JayCee's improvements. The TA consistently calls for tensions in the mid fifties to low sixties. Would a modified version more consistently call for tensions in the mid forties to mid fifties for better playability?
Next I need to purchase a Stringlab or ERT 300, and a stringmeter, so I KNOW my results are consistent, measurable, and reproducible. Who knew this would evolve into the technical and cerebral wonderland that it has!
Lots to comment on here. There is a need for honesty and transparency from string and racket manufacturers. I think that we, as the stringing community, are hungry for that, and some have made an attempt to make this happen. It's a sorry state of affairs that we have to get the knowledge we are hungry for from third hand or from old posts on other websites.
In other words, "Hear hear!" There appears to be a chorus of voices who would like to see Fred Timmer and Jaycee reinstated on this board.
And Mr. Bond, thank you for your generous sharing of knowledge from the source. It's still a little murky over here, but the overall picture of a more excellent method than that espoused by most is taking shape.
Dave
This conversation is going exactly where I had hoped it would at the beginning. This stuff may appear to be dry and technical to most, but once you begin to take an earnest interest in stringing excellence, it becomes technical, but not dry at all. Very rich, indeed! I'm learning with every post, and looking stuff up and brainstorming over here in Oregon.
A few comments, questions, and ideas.
This database is useful, but still limited. It appears to be only based on string jobs done by others, and doesn't give the elasticity characteristics of the strings themselves.
I've had the same impression. My string beds feel stiffer using the pieces of JayCee's method I have so far. Is it really the goal, then, to lower overall tension once stringing efficiency has been achieved? It seems that JayCee has modified and perhaps improved upon the Stringway Tension Adviser, and perhaps there is a need for a modified TA table based on JayCee's improvements. The TA consistently calls for tensions in the mid fifties to low sixties. Would a modified version more consistently call for tensions in the mid forties to mid fifties for better playability?
Next I need to purchase a Stringlab or ERT 300, and a stringmeter, so I KNOW my results are consistent, measurable, and reproducible. Who knew this would evolve into the technical and cerebral wonderland that it has!
Lots to comment on here. There is a need for honesty and transparency from string and racket manufacturers. I think that we, as the stringing community, are hungry for that, and some have made an attempt to make this happen. It's a sorry state of affairs that we have to get the knowledge we are hungry for from third hand or from old posts on other websites.
In other words, "Hear hear!" There appears to be a chorus of voices who would like to see Fred Timmer and Jaycee reinstated on this board.
And Mr. Bond, thank you for your generous sharing of knowledge from the source. It's still a little murky over here, but the overall picture of a more excellent method than that espoused by most is taking shape.
Dave
Last edited:
A Proposal
I'm not the most computer savvy person in the world. I don't even know how to set up a spread sheet. However, how hard can it be? So here's the deal.
If the stringing community is hungry for elasticity characteristics of strings, and manufacturers are not providing that info, then I will do my small part.
I have a SW ML100 T92. Excellent machine, known as much for accuracy as for simplicity. You send me a sample of string, any string, and I will determine the elasticity of that string, place it on a spread sheet, and make it available to anybody who wants to see it. If someone else wants to do this, please do. But if no one else does, then I will.
Let's take this into our own hands. Let's be honest about the quality of the strings, the methods we use, and the rackets we frame. Without objective information, we are all just shooting in the dark.
Any takers?
Dave
PS: I may post this separately. It seems to me that this subject alone is fodder for a large, well developed thread.
I'm not the most computer savvy person in the world. I don't even know how to set up a spread sheet. However, how hard can it be? So here's the deal.
If the stringing community is hungry for elasticity characteristics of strings, and manufacturers are not providing that info, then I will do my small part.
I have a SW ML100 T92. Excellent machine, known as much for accuracy as for simplicity. You send me a sample of string, any string, and I will determine the elasticity of that string, place it on a spread sheet, and make it available to anybody who wants to see it. If someone else wants to do this, please do. But if no one else does, then I will.
Let's take this into our own hands. Let's be honest about the quality of the strings, the methods we use, and the rackets we frame. Without objective information, we are all just shooting in the dark.
Any takers?
Dave
PS: I may post this separately. It seems to me that this subject alone is fodder for a large, well developed thread.
Technatic
Professional
Stringqualities and classification
I think your proposal is great and I certainly want to cooperate.
It may be a first step towards a quality and classification system for strings.
I think it is important to define the method of testing the strings so that it is easy for manufacturers to create their own figures and so that the figures measured by different people can be compared.
I know how Stringway does the tests that are shown in the table so if that is useful we can use that as a basis.
I suggest that we continue this item in the new threat that Verbouge started.
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=335316
I think your proposal is great and I certainly want to cooperate.
It may be a first step towards a quality and classification system for strings.
I think it is important to define the method of testing the strings so that it is easy for manufacturers to create their own figures and so that the figures measured by different people can be compared.
I know how Stringway does the tests that are shown in the table so if that is useful we can use that as a basis.
I suggest that we continue this item in the new threat that Verbouge started.
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=335316
Hi Dave,
The SW-TA was developped for multi-filament strings, the advised tensions are obviously about 4-6lbs higher than the tensions that I would recommend for mono-filament strings.
There is another notable difference when using multi-filament strings, to obtain good control it is necessary to increase the tension on the mains by 2 to 4lbs, compared to the tension on the crosses. So the tensions on the crosses, as given on the SW-TA are reasonably correct when using a mono in the crosses, but the advised tension for a mono in the mains is too high by about 4lbs.
Rather than making a rough guess of what tensions you need to adjust or compensate, here is what I do :
1. Your set-tension range depends essentially on the ideal SBS for the player. Most of my players prefer a string-bed stiffness of 34kgs/cm2 +/-2 (the better players go up to 36kgs/cm2 and the leasure players prefer a more comfortable 32kgs/cm2).
2. when using mono-filament strings in the mains and crosses, I set the SW-TA racquet length at 34cms instead of 35cms.
When stringing a mono/multi hybrid, the mains should be Strung at 4lbs less than the crosses, so it is better to set the length of the frame on the SW-TA at -2cms, so 33cms instead of 35cms.
This of course is a personal liberty that I have taken with the SW Tension Advisor and I have arrived at these "adjustments" by trial and error. I have not consulted Stringway about this, but JayCee told me that it was logical and he would check it out (no news as yet!!). I am a perfectionist, so I felt that I needed to "do my own thing" to get the results that I was looking for. I'm happy with this now, it works well for me and gives me a very good basis to work on when I am trying to find a well calculated starting point with a new client. Once the first test has been made, then it's generally just "some fine tuning" to really get it right. The closer you can get to the right tensions as of the first test, the easier it is to find the best solution.
You must respect 3 variables, however it is better if the player's racquet is well suited to the player's needs (which is not always evident) :
1. Determine the most appropriate SBS for the player*
2. Choose the right strings and gauges for the frame and the player
3. Calculate the correct set tensions for mains and crosses to be able to obtain the SBS value that you have determined as being ideal for the player
This is almost a fool-proof path to becoming a competant and successful stringer who can string to an end result rather than any given "set-tension".
Cheers,
James.
*this is yet another subject to elaborate (this thread is becoming long . . .)
Last edited:
aussie
Professional
Welcome back James to this board. It has been too long since we had such thoughtful views on stringing. I and I guess many others are reading these posts with keen anticipation. We can never learn too much and we need to keep questioning and challenging established stringing methods. Keep it going and indeed I did have a couple of cold VBs last night with my sister!!
@aussie - could you please email me the article? j a c e k g 6 7 @ y a h o o . c o m
aussie
Professional
On its way to you. If your French is reasonable, you'll be fine. aussie.
Hi Guys,
Here is a link to a pdf-file "stage méthode a corder" with about 70 photos with JayCee showing a french stringer how to string a racquet using his method with flying clamps.
There is not much text and more than enough photos, so it is easy enough to get the general idea of how JayCee does a string-job.
Since he has adopted the triple flying clamp (about 2 years ago), he doesn't finish each of the mains on a cross string as shown in the pdf from Aussie (except for the Head Classic 600, where this is still the best way to string this racquet).
He now uses the triple clamp to finish the last 2 mains on each side of the frame, where necessary he will jump the 2nd last main, as follows 6th > 8th > 7th tie-off on the 6th.
Hope this clarifies things for you.
Cheers,
James
Here is a link to a pdf-file "stage méthode a corder" with about 70 photos with JayCee showing a french stringer how to string a racquet using his method with flying clamps.
There is not much text and more than enough photos, so it is easy enough to get the general idea of how JayCee does a string-job.
Since he has adopted the triple flying clamp (about 2 years ago), he doesn't finish each of the mains on a cross string as shown in the pdf from Aussie (except for the Head Classic 600, where this is still the best way to string this racquet).
He now uses the triple clamp to finish the last 2 mains on each side of the frame, where necessary he will jump the 2nd last main, as follows 6th > 8th > 7th tie-off on the 6th.
Hope this clarifies things for you.
Cheers,
James
All this discussion of JayCee method has little to do with the original question of this thread. The last time I read the JayCee method it had more to do with JayCee's preference for using flying clamps.
As for pulling the last few mains at a higher tension and everyone saying that this takes out the elasticity of those strings but is done to make for an overall stiffer stringbed, why would a higher tension necessarily do this? What if the same string used for a different person was strung higher, would this mean their whole string job wasn't any good and the string was without elasticity?
As for pulling the last few mains at a higher tension and everyone saying that this takes out the elasticity of those strings but is done to make for an overall stiffer stringbed, why would a higher tension necessarily do this? What if the same string used for a different person was strung higher, would this mean their whole string job wasn't any good and the string was without elasticity?
Hey man,
Despite your opinion, we are still on the subject of "stringbed stiffness vs string tension" because the very basis of the JayCee method of stringing is to try to eliminate the loss of tension between the "set tension" and the "average stringbed tension". Once again this concerns mono-filament strings where :
- the slightest draw-back,
- the slightest slipping of the string in the knots,
- any over-shoot in applying the tension to the strings,
- any negligence in straightening the crosses when under tension
- anything that can cause slack in the strings
will all lead to a significant loss of tension in the stringbed.
If the average stringbed tension is within 2lbs of the set tension on the machine, then the playability of the strings will be essentially preserved. The strings should give good power, reasonable comfort, excellent control and good durabilty as long as the gauge is adapted to the string pattern, the surface area of the strings and the player's type of game.
If the average stringbed tension is lower than a difference of -2lbs, the bigger the difference the poorer the playabilty of the strings will be.
The initial set tension can be 40 > 60lbs (or more) if this corresponds to the needs of the player and the specifications of his racquet, if the set tension is also what you get in the stringbed. However, if you string at 60lbs and you stringbed tension is only 48lbs, then the string is dead, the playability is hopeless and the player is not getting the most out of his racquet (nor his game).
If the player has a reasonably good length of ball with this set-up (48lbs in the stringbed) and if instead of stringing at 60lbs, you can string at 50lbs by using JayCee's method, then the player is still ending up with about 48lbs in his stringbed. The difference in his sensations are unbelievable. More power, more comfort, better control, the stringbed will hold its tension and the strings their playabilty 2-3 times longer.
Dave, if this is not on the initial subject of this thread, please set me back on the right path, I just wanted to clarify a couple of points for Clintspin who is worried that I'm barnstorming your thread.
I will happily crawl back in my hole, after getting our butts kicked yesterday by the Germans (and the referee), we have nowhere to go in the World Cup that we thought we could win this year . . .
Cheers,
James
Last edited:
Dave, if this is not on the initial subject of this thread, please set me back on the right path, I just wanted to clarify a couple of points for Clintspin who is worried that I'm barnstorming your thread.
I will happily crawl back in my hole, after getting our butts kicked yesterday by the Germans (and the referee), we have nowhere to go in the World Cup that we thought we could win this year . . .
Cheers,
James
And kick out such an outstanding voice to this thread? No way!
I read Clintspin's thoughts yesterday, and had the same feeling that you voiced in this post. It seems this post has not "wandered" away from its original subject, but instead has "naturally gravitated" toward discussing and understanding a particular stringing method that revolves around the subject of interest, string bed stiffness.
This thread has become long and interesting. I would wonder, though, if a new thread dedicated to the Jaycee method would not be something to think about in the near future. I'm not an expert at the dynamics of forums and threads, but it seems to me that many on this thread agree that string bed stiffness is a superior basis for stringing than mere tension. There may come a point where this thread plays itself out, and others are spawned based on discussions that came out of this one.
Just asking you all, if I were to start a thread dedicated to Jaycee's method, or at least to the best way of stringing for SBS, should it be here or in "Strings and Stringing"? I know this isn't really the right forum for this, but if the quality of discussion is any indication, perhaps this wasn't really such a bad idea. Either way is fine with me.
Sorry about England :-(
Cheers,
Dave
TenniseaWilliams
Professional
I must be misunderstanding this, I don't believe it is possible (or even desirable) to get installed tension within 2lbs of reference tension on crosses. Friction against the mains, clamping distance from the hoop, and minute changes in hoop dimensions are major factors decreasing final installed tension.
Last edited:
JamesBond I second Verbouge's statement that your input has been valuable and don't let anyone discourage you from sharing. It's an open forum and appreciate your contribution.
Perhaps we need to revisit Jaycee stringing method. I don't think I have his method down 100%. Also it appears that he uses flying clamps and not all of us have that equipment. Not sure if the same method applies for fixed clamps and whether the increase in tension for the last 2 mains & crosses applies. Also is there a need to double pull 1st 2 crosses.
Perhaps we need to revisit Jaycee stringing method. I don't think I have his method down 100%. Also it appears that he uses flying clamps and not all of us have that equipment. Not sure if the same method applies for fixed clamps and whether the increase in tension for the last 2 mains & crosses applies. Also is there a need to double pull 1st 2 crosses.
From what I have read JayCees method as he explains it, has everything to do with using flying clamps. He is trying to use a method that makes the drawback and knot tension loss issues less of an issue.
I have fixed clamps on all of my machines but I find the flying clamps fun to use and none are smoother than the Stringway clamps. So I took my fixed clamps off and used the flying clamps for about 6 months. They are great fun to use but you do run into so many issues with them because so many racquets are designed differently. You have to think your way through many issues. You begin to see why someone, like JayCee, who prefers using flying clamps would need to explore ways to minimize tension loss. In the process he may have discovered some good things. I put my fixed clamps back on but still like using the stringway flying clamps to do the crosses on my Ektelon machine.
Several of you seemed to get very defensive. I didn't put anybody down. I just ask if we weren't straying from the main subject. It would be interesting to have the input of dozens of world class stringers. What are their ideas on the subject. We have some stringers that have been satisfying tourning pros for decades. Warren Bosworth was able to keep a lot of customers happy with the methods he used and I believe he was stringing with a crank machine. Ivan Lendl wasn't complaining.
I own three machines, two stand-up Stringway machines (one foot-pedal and one drop weight) and an old Ektelon DE. I think they all turn out a great job. I think the Ektelon turns out a job that feels as good as the Stringway machines. Don't get me wrong, I really like my Stringway machines and I love the way Fred is quick to help you out. They seem like a good company. I am baffled that they are putting down the crank machines ability to do a good job even though Alpha distributes their machines in the USA. I would be a little annoyed if I was Alpha.
I have fixed clamps on all of my machines but I find the flying clamps fun to use and none are smoother than the Stringway clamps. So I took my fixed clamps off and used the flying clamps for about 6 months. They are great fun to use but you do run into so many issues with them because so many racquets are designed differently. You have to think your way through many issues. You begin to see why someone, like JayCee, who prefers using flying clamps would need to explore ways to minimize tension loss. In the process he may have discovered some good things. I put my fixed clamps back on but still like using the stringway flying clamps to do the crosses on my Ektelon machine.
Several of you seemed to get very defensive. I didn't put anybody down. I just ask if we weren't straying from the main subject. It would be interesting to have the input of dozens of world class stringers. What are their ideas on the subject. We have some stringers that have been satisfying tourning pros for decades. Warren Bosworth was able to keep a lot of customers happy with the methods he used and I believe he was stringing with a crank machine. Ivan Lendl wasn't complaining.
I own three machines, two stand-up Stringway machines (one foot-pedal and one drop weight) and an old Ektelon DE. I think they all turn out a great job. I think the Ektelon turns out a job that feels as good as the Stringway machines. Don't get me wrong, I really like my Stringway machines and I love the way Fred is quick to help you out. They seem like a good company. I am baffled that they are putting down the crank machines ability to do a good job even though Alpha distributes their machines in the USA. I would be a little annoyed if I was Alpha.
Last edited:
I just love that pseudo, that's real inspiration,
Sorry to confuse you, but I will try to answer your post as well as I can.:|
True, as you probably know the average tension in the cross strings is about 33% les than the "set tension" which means that although you apply 60lbs on the cross string, you will not get more than 40lbs tenszion once it is in place. There are many reasons for this, you have mentioned a few of them. This is often a big problem for stringers who have a Stringmeter (which allows them to measure the tension string by string) because the results obtained seem to be completely wrong, therefore they tend to assume that the device doesn't work . . .
As for your misunderstandings, I have never mentioned the tension on the cross strings, I have mentionned :
- the tension on the mains (measured with a Stringmeter)
- the average stringbed tension (measured with the iPhone Application "RacquetTune"
- I have referred to SBS (stringbed stiffness) DT in Kg/cm2, and the use of the SW StringLab and Tension Advisor
If you want to introduce the notion of residual tension of the crosses in the stringbed, I too will have serious misunderstandings, it's already complicated enough as it is . . . .
Cheers man,
James
Hi Clintspin,
I go along with what you are saying, in the rest of your post as well, just for info a recently acquired a 14 year old MS.200 with T.92 fixed clamps (single action) and of course the spring and pedal system on a stand. Apparantly this machine has strung more than 8,000 racquets and it is still in very good working order.
I bought it mainly for the Prince 03 racquets, I string them every day and quite honestly they are easier to string with fixed clamps than with my flying clamps. It's also true for a few other frames. The pedal tensioner is awesome, once you get used to it, it's hard to go back to the drop weight.
I do prefer the floaters for the crosses, but if I start a frame on fixed clamps, I stick with them all the way.
Where I agree with you entirely, SW flying clamps are really fun to use. I have a great feeling with the string, I never feel that I'm fighting it, but working together with it, its sensual, I enjoy stringing more when using them, it's nice to see that somebody else understands the same feeling. If you've never tried them it's hard to explain this experience.
Thanks,
James
Last edited:
Thanks!
Thanks!
I do have a question, or clarification if I get it right. So the general idea is to be able to come up with string tension for a given racket/string combination such that when racket is actually played it 'feels right' to a given player. Makes perfect sense. In order to 'predict' the correct tension (separately for main and crosses) I need to find out what the correct dynamic tension is. To find out DT I need to know:
- string type. This is labeled C1 through C4 on the 'route map' drawing, in circle. It seems that the string classification into four classes is somewhat arbitrary, no? how do I decide what 'type' a given string is?
- player's type of play. that is even less scientific, but somewhat understandable it is that way. we are looking for a ballpark estimation, right?
so once found what the correct DT should be, given racket head size, I can find out the correct tension.
on a separate note. In related links there is also talk about stringing method where certain strings are strung higher/lower than the rest.
First - how does this idea relate to DT and TA tables? the tables seem to indicate you string all mains with the same tension, and all crosses with the same tension.
Second, does that even have any merit? It seems to me that since a string is basically a long single piece bent several times in grommets the tension is going to settle after some time/hitting regardless of whether some mains were strung differently than the other.
Technatic
Professional
I you think you get it perfectly right.
Basis for the system is that you choose a certain DT value that suits the player. The Tension Advisor calculates the right tensions to get that result depending on the size of the racquet head and the number of strings.
But do not forget that the relation between tension and stiffness depends strongly on the type of machine and the qualities of the stringer.
Easy check on the difference between tensions for the mains and crosses is: Check if the length and width of the racquet are the same after stringing as they were before (without stirngs).
The C1 to C4 classification of the strings was done by Stringway based on the elongation figures and the durability of the string. This is discussed also in this threat:
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=335316
It is the combination of tension and string-type that should be as good as possible for a certain player. Do not give a poly to an old guy with an arm injury!!! Not even on low tension because the elasticity of the string is bad and will not offer the power of a good multi.
Good luck with the system
Tecna
I have been too busy to get back to this discussion. So here goes.
I am a fan of the idea of not distorting the racquet and I like the stringway tension advisor system but it leads me to more questions than answers many times. For example let's say I had a racquet that called for the tension on the mains to be 58 and the crosses 54. The customer wants a hybrid of a co-poly and something like Gosen og 17ga. I know that this co-poly should be strung 4lbs lower. Now, if I string at 54 for the mains and 54 for the crosses am I still distorting the racquet at least initially? As the string changes over the next 24 hrs will the racquet now become undistorted? Assuming the Gosen gives more over the 24 hour period than the co-poly.
I am a fan of the idea of not distorting the racquet and I like the stringway tension advisor system but it leads me to more questions than answers many times. For example let's say I had a racquet that called for the tension on the mains to be 58 and the crosses 54. The customer wants a hybrid of a co-poly and something like Gosen og 17ga. I know that this co-poly should be strung 4lbs lower. Now, if I string at 54 for the mains and 54 for the crosses am I still distorting the racquet at least initially? As the string changes over the next 24 hrs will the racquet now become undistorted? Assuming the Gosen gives more over the 24 hour period than the co-poly.
000KFACTOR90000
Professional
I've been using the tension advisor lately but I feel I have to address the issue of friction in the crosses http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gwjDUQAGZMY by pulling every cross string twice.
I believe the Jaycee method advocates upping the crosses by 4 lbs to deal with this, but I think using the tension advisor and pulling the crosses twice may be more accurate.
I believe the Jaycee method advocates upping the crosses by 4 lbs to deal with this, but I think using the tension advisor and pulling the crosses twice may be more accurate.
Technatic
Professional
When you Use the TA for hybrid stringing it is important to know the stretch qualities of both strings.
The tension in the racquet is maintained by the elastic elongation of the string.
The elastic elongation of multis is much better than of monos. So I agree that you have to use a lower tension for the Gosen.
The only check for the used tensions is if the racquet head has the same length and width after stringing. If that is ok this will not change much anymore.
I do not see what difference it makes to pull tension twice, or do you use a lock out tensioner?
I think that it is very important to straighten the crosses while the tension is applied.
You measure the length and width of the empty racquet, and check if these dimensions are the same after string, so that the stress in the racquet is minimum.
hey technatic, can you please send me the TA tables if you have em at virtualanh@yahoo.com. I just discovered the "jaycee method" and the TA from SW. Thanks
Hi KFACTOR,
There was a guy who posted on this thread for a while who said he know's JayCee and learned directly from him. His user name is James Bond. I would suggest you check out the posts in the 60's in this thread, especially post #66. I read and re-read that one, as well as a number of others, and have since incorporated the method described in that thread into my stringing practice. It works amazingly well for me, and seriously, the people I string for rave about my work compared to the regional pro shop that strings most of the racquets here (Portland area) . So I know that he was on to something with that posting.
If you have any questions after reading that, I may or may not be able to answer them, but by all means ask them and keep this discussion alive to the extent that they need to be answered. There are some who lurk on this board who are very knowledgeable and willing to share.
This thread kind of comes back to life every so often. I love this stuff and can't get enough of it. The more knowledge and exchange of ideas, the better!
Dave
000KFACTOR90000
Professional
Hi Tecnatic, I use a CP machine and always straigten crosses under tension.
I'm talking about friction from the mains on the cross strings - hope you understand - yulitle's video in my previous post shows the problem well.
000KFACTOR90000
Professional
Thanks Dave, yeah I researched all the Jaycee threads quite well before using the tension advisor and I actually contacted Jaycee asking if he could write the definative book or create a more complex tension advisor maybe as an iphone app.
000KFACTOR90000
Professional
ps. My first batch of tension advisor racquets (my personal sticks) feel great and I was able to test mids and oversized racquets with the same string and DT which will definitely save money when testing new strings
Last edited:
Thanks Techna!! I got the tables!!! But quick question, the route map is based on string type but how do I know if its C1-C4?
Technatic
Professional
String classification!!!
IN my opinion this is a major lack of information in the tennis industry.
These 2 discussions tell you more about this item:
http://www.stringforum.net/board/showthread.php?t=3655
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=335316
IN my opinion this is a major lack of information in the tennis industry.
These 2 discussions tell you more about this item:
http://www.stringforum.net/board/showthread.php?t=3655
http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=335316
hey techna, I have a question about the jaycee method and the using the TA tables. If I use the SW TA table, how do I incorporate it with the jaycee method? If the table calls for tension of mains 60/ cross 57, I know how to use the jc method for the mains, but how do i continue with the crosses? Since the jc method begins the crosses with +4 kg of the last 2 mains, and then -2 kg for the middle crosses, what about the recommended 57 lb for the cross? Hope you can clear it up.
Thanks
Thanks
Technatic
Professional
I do not understand completely what yulitle is proving. Every string that you pull for the second time is longer than it was before the first pull, because the remaining elongation has been pulled out of the string in the first pull.
This is easy to test: Just put 2 marks on a string at a certain distance and pull it once and back to zero. you will see that the string i considerably longer.
I am not using Jaycees method, but always use the TA, it is built in my EM450. I just use the calculated tension of the TA and pull the last 2 to 3 crosses at Knot tension to compensate for the extra friction.
I do not see a reason to pull 4 lbs extra on the first crosses, because these are the shorter strings and at that moment the friction is low.
But JayCee certainly has reasons for his method because he is quite a perfectionist
drakulie
Talk Tennis Guru
The "stringway method", as is any other method, is based on "trial and error non-method", and continues to evolve and/or change with no real "solution".
The only "truth in stringing" in relation to your topic is what each and every individual customer holds as their own "truth". That's it. There is no "magic". Each person responds differently to tension, strings, how those two are effected by stringer, and or machine used, pattern (atw, two piece, one piece, etc, etc, etc).
newyorkstadium
Professional
In a hybrid, if you change to a 5lbs stiffer main, how much must you adjust the tension to achieve the same stringbed stiffness?
Last edited:
newyorkstadium
Professional
Anyone....
Similar threads
