Yonex SV95 Tie Offs

[Karma Tennis]

Hi Everyone,

According to various images on the net, using Two Piece stringing, the Tie Offs for the new Yonex VCore SV95 are as follows ...

Mains - 7 Bottom
Top Cross - 6 Top
Bottom Cross - 11 Bottom
(Mains Skip - 8 Top and 8 Bottom)

What are the advantages or disadvantages of stringing Tie Offs as follows?...

Mains - 7 Bottom
Top Cross - 7 Top
Bottom Cross - 10 Bottom

All Tie Offs would be shorter which is probably a good thing.

However, one of the 7th Main strings would be an anchor string for both a Main and the Top Cross. Could that create any problems?

The other alternative I could use is this one ...

Mains - 7 Bottom
Top Cross - 6 Top
Bottom Cross - 10 Bottom

Bottom Cross Tie Off would be shorter but rest are unchanged.

(Note: I always start Cross strings with a Starting Clamp and then Tie Off 1st Cross with a Parnell Knot. These days I use the Parnell Knot for all Tie Offs.)

 

[Irvin]

...What are the advantages or disadvantages of stringing Tie Offs as follows?...

Mains - 7 Bottom
Top Cross - 7 Top
Bottom Cross - 10 Bottom

You would be moving the tie off closer to the clamps by about 1/2" which is no big deal. All the tie offs you have chosen that are not tie offs normally the anchor string moves diagonally though the grommet. That means you must open the grommet more in order to get your tie off through the holes and if your using soft string even more difficult.

All Tie Offs would be shorter which is probably a good thing.

Like I said no big deal[/quote]

However, one of the 7th Main strings would be an anchor string for both a Main and the Top Cross. Could that create any problems?

Not so much that it would change anything.

The other alternative I could use is this one ...

Mains - 7 Bottom
Top Cross - 6 Top
Bottom Cross - 10 Bottom

Bottom Cross Tie Off would be shorter but rest are unchanged.

(Note: I always start Cross strings with a Starting Clamp and then Tie Off 1st Cross with a Parnell Knot. These days I use the Parnell Knot for all Tie Offs.)

Do you really think changed the bottom cross tie off will do something magic? Even if you change it you gain nothing.

 

[Karma Tennis]

Do you really think changed the bottom cross tie off will do something magic? Even if you change it you gain nothing.

Well, with shorter Tie Offs, after stringing about 100 racquets I will have saved enough string to string an extra one

Seriously though, Thanks for your input @Irvin. I didn't think it would be an issue but I've never strung any racquet before where I have used the same main string as an anchor string for two Tie Offs.

On a slightly different note, I notice that the Yonex racquets with the isometric shape have a much flatter hoop at the top and bottom compared to more "traditional" shapes. Also, the Yonex hoops are a lot thinner than other racquets I usually string. Is there any benefit in using those small H shaped plastic load spreader devices with the Yonex frames?

 

[Irvin]

Well, with shorter Tie Offs, after stringing about 100 racquets I will have saved enough string to string an extra one

Unless you're using a reel of string a lot longer than 660' I find that very hard to believe. If you saved an inch on three tie offs that's 3" per job and if you got 20 jobs a reel that's only 5' per reel not enough for 1/2 string job.

Now if you were to use a starting knot you could save 1' for every string job. You do the math that a lot more saving than what you're talking about. If you're looking for better savings.

On a slightly different note, I notice that the Yonex racquets with the isometric shape have a much flatter hoop at the top and bottom compared to more "traditional" shapes. Also, the Yonex hoops are a lot thinner than other racquets I usually string. Is there any benefit in using those small H shaped plastic load spreader devices with the Yonex frames?

Load spreaders seem like a good thing for any racket. I don't know they'd work any better on a Yonex.

 

[Karma Tennis]

You do the math that a lot more saving than what you're talking about. If you're looking for better savings.

Load spreaders seem like a good thing for any racket. I don't know they'd work any better on a Yonex.

I string mostly using Pro's Pro string. Works out to about $1.80 per racquet so I'm not that fussed.

The load spreaders I have seem to "fit" the Yonex racquets a lot better than those with more traditional hoop shapes. The extra peace of mind is probably worth the few dollars I spent on them.

 

[Irvin]

I string mostly using Pro's Pro string. Works out to about $1.80 per racquet so I'm not that fussed.

Are you bragging or complaining. On my Babolat machine I put a new tension module on it after I bought it. Maybe I could have fixed the old one myself maybe not but I ordered a new one before I knew what was wrong. Anyway the cost per racket now is down to about 60 cents per racket and you will never catch up. I'm never going to complain about the price.

The cost of the string I use is always passed on the the customer too so I can't complain there either.

 

[Karma Tennis]

Are you bragging or complaining. ... Anyway the cost per racket now is down to about 60 cents per racket and you will never catch up. I'm never going to complain about the price.

For the string I use, I'm very happy with $1.80 a job.

I got my used LO Stringer for a bargain price. After using it for a year, I'm well ahead $$$ wise. Could easily purchase a new Wise head and still be in front. but just don't string enough racquets at this stage to justify it.

For sure, if I was stringing racquets at the same rate you are I would never catch up. But you're probably stringing 4, maybe 5 times as many racquets a year as I am. In which case I'm ahead of you already because I will never spend as much on string as you do

 

[Dso]

I just saw this after I strung mine and I looked at the tie offs on the TW review of the racquet.

Mains at 7 Bottom
Crosses at 7 Top, 11 Bottom

No room for tie off of Bottom Cross at 10 as you suggested above.

 

[Wes]

Mains at 7 Bottom
Crosses at 7 Top, 11 Bottom

No room for tie off of Bottom Cross at 10 as you suggested above.

There could/would be room... if he wanted to tie off at alternate locations.
The implication, that you're missing, is that the requisite grommets would be enlarged beforehand.
If he knows where he ultimately wants to tie off, he'll enlarge the necessary grommet(s).
It's all part of planning ahead.

 

[Dso]

There could/would be room... if he wanted to tie off at alternate locations.
The implication, that you're missing, is that the requisite grommets would be enlarged beforehand.
If he knows where he ultimately wants to tie off, he'll enlarge the necessary grommet(s).
It's all part of planning ahead.

Ok fair enough… but I see no value in doing that. PITA. I'll always opt for the big hole already there.

 

[Dso]

Also- the only thing I would do different on this is to tie off the cross at 6 on the top. I don't like it when the knot is very close to the string (top cross in this case).

 

[am1899]

I'll always opt for the big hole already there.

That's what he said?

Ahem! Anyway...IMHO that's usually a reasonable approach, but not always.

 

[Dso]

That's what he said?

Ahem! Anyway...IMHO that's usually a reasonable approach, but not always.

Yeah that was not well written… but at least we agree.

 

[OrangePower]

I've been doing tie offs on my SV95 as follows:
Mains - 7 Bottom
Top Cross - 6 Top
Bottom Cross - 9 Bottom
Mains and top cross consistent with what others have said, but no-one else has mentioned 9 bottom as a potential tie off.
Any reason against this?
I just string for myself so wouldn't know any better
I ended doing it this way because 10 bottom was my first inclination but I discovered that it's blocked (as others mentioned), and 9 was closer than 11 (and I could get the tie off string through it easily enough).

 

[Dso]

If I were to do it again I'd do:

Mains at 7 (Bottom of course)
Cross Top 6
Cross Bottom 11

I don't think I'd do Cross Bottom at 9 because it's too close to the 2nd cross. I hate it when the tie offs are right next to a string like that. Like my top cross on 7 that I did.

I'm not sure if there is any advantage to tying off on a main instead of a cross like 9 instead of 11?

 

[OrangePower]

If I were to do it again I'd do:

Mains at 7 (Bottom of course)
Cross Top 6
Cross Bottom 11

I don't think I'd do Cross Bottom at 9 because it's too close to the 2nd cross. I hate it when the tie offs are right next to a string like that. Like my top cross on 7 that I did.

I'm not sure if there is any advantage to tying off on a main instead of a cross like 9 instead of 11?

Yeah I'm now second guessing myself about potential issues tying off on the main at 9. But the top cross tie off is necessarily on a main, so how bad can it be.
Using 11 allows it to tie off on a cross, but is that really a consideration?
I think there's more room to get the string through at 11, so maybe if using a thicker string that's the only option (although 9 was no issue for me).

 

[Dso]

Yeah I'm now second guessing myself about potential issues tying off on the main at 9. But the top cross tie off is necessarily on a main, so how bad can it be.
Using 11 allows it to tie off on a cross, but is that really a consideration?
I think there's more room to get the string through at 11, so maybe if using a thicker string that's the only option (although 9 was no issue for me).

I don't think it's a big deal really… but I'm not a pro. I'm sure 9 is fine now that I look at it again. It's surprising how many larger grommet holes there are on this racquet.

 

[Karma Tennis]

Ive strung several of these now several times using the original tieoffs mentioned in my first post. Working fine with string diameters up to 1.30mm round.

There are a lot of flared grommets on this model straight out of the box.

 

[teekaywhy]

Yonex has been knurling/flaring their grommet holes for a while. Pretty durable for the most part.