I've been wanting to test this combination for quite a while.
The thin 0.90mm fishing line plays very soft. From what I know, soft strings pair up best with stiff ones. That's how hybrids like gut/poly or poly/syn gut became so popular.
Here's some pics...
This very thin fishing line is extremely difficult to string. So far, most occasions when I used it were troublesome. Rarely straightforward.
Right after the completed racket was dismounted, the fish mains snapped! Not the first time it happened, so I clamped near the snapped portion immediately and re-mounted the racket.
As there wasn't any fishing line already heavily pre-stretched, I used some leftover fishing line and patched the stringjob. The other alternative was to ditch everything, but since it was my own racket, I could accept a patch. (You can see two extra knots in the pic below at RM3 & RM4.)
In case you're unaware, string patch jobs were extremely common during wood rackets' heydays. Then, only natural gut was available, and whenever a string snapped, it was usually patched and re-used! (link) So much so, that it was common to see multiple knots in one racket, and even multi-toned natural guts from different batches!
Playtest:
- Played with a fit and fast lefty named BL.
- As usual, most of the younger folks I met were using the Babolat AeroPro Drive strung with RPM Blast in the mid-50s.
- BL tested this setup and liked the soft cushioning and string bite.
- At my receiving end, there was a lot more spin coming across with this setup. Most of his previously hip high topspin shots started kicking aggressively and offensively upwards to my ear height. My timing went haywire immediately and I frame-hit many shots, recovering only after I took two steps back.
- When I tested it, the patched area was soft but not uncontrollable. It was powerful, comfortable and very spinny.
- It played quite similar to another previous fishing line/poly setup (link) but this had much more "bite".
- Some notching was observed after just one session and only the patched strings moved.
01May2014 update:
- A friend borrowed this racket and snapped the mains! Couldn't blame him entirely since the strings were already notched from my first session.
- He managed to hit with it for about 90 minutes. So in total, the thin fishing line lasted only about 2.5 hours. (Both my friend and I are not hard-hitters anymore)
- The comfort impressed him the most, followed by spin and then the controllable power.
- This chap is quite well-to-do. He liked the string enough to "sponsor" my hunt for a more easily available fishing line instead of from Japan.
- Despite the hassle of pre-stretching and re-stringing with the very delicate (and temperamental) fishing line, I couldn't shake it off my mind. It played too nice to ignore. I'll have to live with this very short playing life of the string!
While the second attempt of the Lendl pattern (link) offered a lot more comfort, power and control over the first, it was still not enough to placate this syn gut lover.
My set of old and lazy bones needed just a little more comfort, a little more pocketing and a LOT more power. Extra spin would be nice too!
However hard I try, my footwork was no longer fast enough. That meant insufficient time for those old school long loopy swings that I have been accustomed to.
Many previous attempts skipping crosses compromised control in return for comfort, power and spin. (link1)(link2)(link3)
Now, by skipping every third instead of alternate cross, maybe I could tone down some power and add back control? In addition, I was also hoping for a little more pocketing to deal with the harsh feel when the stiff poly stringbed stops giving.
Not sure how to interpret the ITF tennis rules regarding this string pattern (link):
"The hitting surface, defined as the main area of the stringing pattern bordered by the points of entry of the strings into the head or points of contact of the strings with the head, whichever is the smaller, shall be flat and consist of a pattern of crossed strings, which shall be alternately interlaced or bonded where they cross. The stringing pattern must be generally uniform and, in particular, not less dense in the centre than in any other area. The racket shall be designed and strung such that the playing characteristics are identical on both faces."
Probably best left to the professional umpires and judges while I have fun trodding down unconventional paths!
Another variation could be skipping every fourth cross instead... I'll let the playtest dictate where this goes...
Playtest:
- The stringbed softened significantly and became as comfortable as any soft syn gut or multi.
- Directional control were good for medium hits, but when I cranked up the power, the control dipped terribly. The crosses were just not enough to support the heavy impact.
- By control dipping, what I meant was the ball depressing very deep into the stringbed and an exceptionally high rebound angle. So heavy topspin shots became topspin lobs which was fun to see, especially towards the end when it dived down steeply.
- Strangely, other aspects of control remained intact, even for serves.
- Spin was good as the mains could really slide and snap-back.
- Volleys were good too and effortless to execute. Just get the racket in the way of the ball and voila! Perfect dropshot!
- Since the rules dictate that the stringing pattern cannot be less dense in the centre, I think it will be good for anyone intending to try this, to string an extra one or two crosses in the centre of the stringbed. That might stiffen up the sweetspot a little to bring ball trajectory nearing to earth.
- Another option could be to string the same but using poly in the crosses instead of syn gut.
- Not much string movement after play, but some ball fur stuck on the strings.
Someone emailed me after reading my previous "Lendl Pattern" attempt (link).
He suggested I string the outside perimeter strings first, then the centre mains and crosses. Previously, I used a soft poly in the centre and syn gut around the perimeter.
The explanation was interesting and sounded convincing. Syn gut, being the softer string is almost always strung at a higher tension than poly. If the lower-tensioned poly was strung before the syn gut, he noticed that his racket frame would compress a little more during the syn gut stringing.
Since the frame was compressed, that led to some "tension loss" of the poly which made it play flat and dead from the first hit.
But how did he know the frame shortened since the racket was mounted?
Well... he claimed he dismounted the racket after completing the poly centre mains and crosses and measured hoop length and width. Complete with a starting clamp dangling at the side!
And he measured again after the softer perimeter strings were done. Shorter it was!
However, when the order was reversed, the dimensions remained constant, he claimed.
While I have several experimental frames to muck around with, I have no intention of finding out how my racket internals look like yet.
So for me, no dismounting halfway, but I'm game enough to give it a try. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.
Also, he added that soft poly strings play much better when strung with lock-out machines as compared to the constant tensioning of electronic and dropweight machines.
Below pic shows the higher-tensioned outer perimeter syn gut being completed first...
Could it be Lendl himself who sent the email? Or his stringer?
Playtest:
- I was pleasantly surprised how comfortable and yet controlled this stringbed played from the first hit!
- The sweetspot was right smack in the middle of the poly strings. It was very easy to find because it was so soft. I cannot recall when have I ever enjoyed this poly so much before.
- Spin seemed average to me, perhaps because I have been using so many extreme spin setups that this did not stand out. As usual, backhand slices were better than forehand topspins.
- Compared to the dead, stiff, boardy and powerless previous attempt (link), this felt like a totally different racket with different strings and different tension. Yet, everything was the same! Only the order of stringing was different!
- Pocketing was nice and harder flat hits were rewarded with accurate and powerful rebounds, with some unintended winners.
- Compared to syn gut, the poly pocketing was still "limited" in how much it gives before the feeling of hitting a wall took over.
- That was the only thing I disliked because the distinct stiff feel of poly was most clearly felt there, when the pocketing reached its limit.
While playing friendly singles with "Z", he was lamenting how he lost most of the points to double faults.
But I felt otherwise. So, I got him to keep score while I did some mental "Shot Stats" for him.
According to my count, the shot stats for the second and third set were, respectively:
6-12-5-1
4-6-12-2
The first, second, third & fourth numbers respectively indicated, for Z, the:
(1) number of double faults,
(2) number of shots hit into the net,
(3) number of shots hit out, and
(4) others like inability to get to the ball, frame hits, double bounce, etc
Clearly, out of 24 points in each set, he lost between 71-75% of the points to what I would deem as "loss of control" issues - hitting into the net or out of court.
As Z was racket testing as well, he used a different stick for each set.
Assuming he was consistent, and adopting the ceteris paribus principle, the numbers seem to indicate, that either:
(1) the racket used in the second set was a little too low-powered for him, or the stringbed's rebound angle was too low, or the strings were dead, or
(2) the racket used for the third set was too powerful, had too high a rebound angle, or was tensioned too low.
Whichever case it was, I still think his serve was very decent for someone who has only been playing casual tennis (mainly rallying) for only six months.
Just before April Fool's day, a friend was dropping off two rackets to be restrung when I asked if he would like to test some new stringing idea I had.
We have done this many times, so he readily agreed, not even asking what was to be done.
This friend held a firm belief, that in order to play his very best, the strings must be freshly strung and pulled tight. He uses multi/syn gut hybrid at 67/65 lbs and restrings after every 8-10 hours of play.
For the pair of matched sticks, I strung one normally, and "experimented" with the other.
Of the total 35 (16+19) mains and crosses, I hand-pulled 20% of them, which is a total 7 strings!
Specifically, all four outer mains and crosses, plus the left mains #3, #4 and right mains #5 were tensioned by hand, aided by a starting clamp while mounted on the stringing machine!
All I intended, was to prank him and get him to loose some control. Then restring that for him at my expense. Instead, this threw up a new discovery!
From the first few hits, he noticed one racket was strung looser. "Not very much looser", he said, but "distinguishable". I was surprised he found it playable and asked him to tell me more, not revealing the secret to him yet.
Thinking it was some exotic setup, he adjusted his strokes and tried to identify areas where this setup could play well. Although looser strung, it was completely different from how his usual setup played after it had lost tension.
This was livelier and controllable! Totally unlike the loss of control and unpredictable rebound of worn strings that had lost tension!
Then I dropped the bomb...
Suffice it to say, he is now happily experimenting with slightly lower tensions and beginning to enjoy them.
After being with me for 20+ years, my old faithful, the ProStaff Classic 6.1 cracked.
Not from racket abuse, but from a hard scrape trying to return a deep, flat and low shot.
It'll be nice if it's just the grommet, but there is a faint buzzing vibration whenever ball contact is made.
About time as well, I guess... After all, this well loved racket had been through at least 200 stringjobs...
Other than wanting more spin, another commonly asked question is which string plays most similarly to natural gut.
Powerful, yet soft, with incredible feel and plushy cupping action, it is little wonder why natural gut managed to seduce and mesmerize so many who have tried it.
I have tested Babolat VS (both with and without BT7), Pacific Classic, Klip Legend and Global Gut. Some clearly needs a fair bit of breaking-in while others played beautifully from the first hit.
So far, my impression of natural gut is that it:
- is soft, comfortable and powerful,
- is very resilient and quick to recover,
- offers tight pocketing and rebounds accurately, and
- holds tension very well.
Only the price is inhibiting. And it does not help that gut and moisture cannot get along at all.
For several months, I have been thinking, testing and re-testing how to replicate the feel of natural gut using a fullbed of synthetic gut.
Exact reproduction is impossible. My aim is to balance the variables of softness, power, comfort, accuracy and resilience and try to get as close to the feel of natural gut as possible.
Probably into my 14th or 15th iteration now, I believe I am getting close. Or I have been so obsessed, I am getting delusional...
Got my old friend "M", who has one of the most sensitive pair of hands I know to try this setup in his Yonex RD-7. On several previous occasions, M could tell a mere 2 grams difference in racket weight! I value his feedback, plus he will be playing with a regular user of natural gut!
It was a mess stringing this setup. Definitely not recommended for those who prefer traditional and compliant stringing methods.
Since M prefers the raw feel of the stringbed, with only a very light dampening, I weaved and tied a rubber band across several main strings for him.
Playtest:
- M has just returned after spending half a year outstation without tennis, so his game was very rusty. Where he was, the winter months gave him little opportunity for exercise.
- With that perspective in mind, M felt that this setup was "very playable" indeed.
- He remarked this stringjob offered a lot of power but yet gave him a strong sense of being in full control.
- For as long as I have strung his several RD-7 rackets for him, we have never been able to juggle both power and control together due to the racket's very soft flex of only RA54! So I believe this "natural gut" simulation is going in the right direction.
- In his words, he played a "much easier game" with this setup although there was "not much spin" from the fullbed syn gut.
- That encouraged him to hit much flatter than usual. While I did not see him play, I think his sudden change from "I want more spin!" to hitting flat could be due to the very addictive plush and deep pocketing this stringing offered, just like natural gut!
- Even when I got a non-tennis playing friend to just bounce the ball using this setup, the only comment was how comfortable the centre of the stringbed felt.
- I have strung up a similar replica on my ProStaff Classic 6.1. Will test it and update here again...
10Apr2014 update:
- Couldn't find a partner and couldn't wait, so I hit the wall with the ProStaff Classic.
- The stringbed felt a little stiff initially but softened after about 10 minutes of hitting.
- The most distinct difference I felt was in how the stringbed "pocketed" the ball.
- When hard flat shots contacted the stringbed of traditionally strung syn gut or multi, there was no "wrap-around" feeling of the strings around the ball. Just a slight cushioned feeling as the ball pressed into the stringbed.
- But with this setup, I could feel the ball slightly deeper in the stringbed like a "cupping" action.
- Compared to normal syn gut, even multi, this rebound was very swift, accurate and powerful. It was a combined feeling of softness and tightness together.
- The loading of power was clearly felt in the strings followed by the release, which was somewhat like a mini-catapult propelling the ball forward in the intended direction.
- Off-centre hits remained unpleasant. It was mainly those which contacted near the sweetspot that offered this gut-like feel.
- When I swapped to my Yamaha racket, the stringbed felt so lifeless and tired. More energy, or a fuller swing was needed to hit the same ball above the net line on the wall, while standing the same distance away.
- I will hit some more with this and update again...
11Apr2014 update:
- Played two sets with "W" using this setup.
- Warm-up rallies were very nice. The slower pace shots gave me time to prepare and aim for better contacts which made the strings more enjoyable.
- Power remained very good and very controllable. It was nowhere near trampoline-like, as I could feel the resistance and tightening of the stringbed during pocketing. This gave me enough confidence in the stringbed for me to call any miss-hits my mistake.
- Because of the power, I no longer needed to force nor swing that hard. I let the racket and stringbed do more of the work for me. As a result, I felt my control, placement and direction improved, simply because I needed to do less.
- Generally, the axiom goes "More power, less control" and vice versa. But in this case, the "free" power allowed me to focus on control much better!
- Serves were much easier and required less work too.
- Spin was average, but on centre hits where the pocketing was deepest, a few topspin shots curled down into the court when I thought they were flying out.
- Below pic shows stringbed after 3 hours of use.
Note:
I will not be updating this post anymore. For those who think this is gibberish, feel free to treat this as fiction, or that I was drunk while writing, whichever pleases you more.
Both Z and I have unfinished business with this frame. (link1)(link2)
In online forums, this racket is notoriously difficult to string.
Specifically, it is the combination of:
(1) very low swingweight of about 300 kg/cm²,
(2) very flexible hoop and throat, and
(3) open 16x15 string pattern.
Conventional wisdom dictates:
(1) Low swingweight = low power
So lower tensions or soft and powerful strings like gut or multifilaments are recommended.
(2) Flexible hoops affects accuracy and requires stiff strings or a very high tension to provide impact stability. But that reduces power and pocketing, which in turn reduces spin.
(3) Open strings require stiff and thick poly strings or thick (1.40mm or more) nylon strings for durability, but these strings inhibit spin and are low-powered as well.
Professional players who use the PS95s like Dolgopolov or Dimitrov (link) focus on control and spin. It is rumoured they lead up their swingweights to 360+ kg/cm² so power is a non-issue. Neither is durability relevant since they restring so often.
But what about mere mortals like Z and I? How do we balance the traditional stringing variables of comfort, spin, control, power and durability?
Something must be sacrificed. For the premium price paid for this "heavy spin" model, and with marketing targeted at "spin chasers", spin cannot be compromised.
Power and control are already lacking, and Z absolutely loved the comfort of synthetic gut. So what could we achieve by sacrificing durability alone?
See the dilemma now?
After some deliberation, I decided to increase both swingweight and total weight to add power, ball pocketing, stability and also "stiffen" the dynamic flex of the racket.
Once the low swingweight and flex problem can be dismissed, stringing would be a little easier. Moreover, I felt a heavier racket could improve Z's timing, considering how fast, strong and fit he is.
After calculating the desired numbers, the previous 6 grams I added was re-positioned. Another 11 grams was added under the butt cap to keep balance at about 31.5cm. Swingweight should now be around 325 kg/cm2 and total weight about 345 grams.
Still being new to this 16x15 string pattern, I aligned the PS95s on top of my ProStaff Classic to understand just how open it was.
The above picture had some parallax error. So I took two closer snapshots from directly on top of the head and throat of the rackets.
Both the first and last cross string of the PS95s are about 1cm nearer the centre of the stringbed than the ProStaff Classic.
Total distance from first cross to last is 24cm for the PS95s and 26cm for the ProStaff Classic. So it seems quite evident, that the open strings are not really THAT open after all.
After establishing that, I decided to use Z's favourite syn gut again. To minimise the string variables so that we can better feel the effects of the weight modifications, I strung using the same modified proportional stringing as before.
Let's see how this would turn out...
Playtest:
- Z's first comments were "I can feel the pocketing and bite". I could see he was very comfortable with syn gut.
- However, the added weight slowed down his swing prep and timing. From my side, I could see he was late in hitting for a lot of balls.
- When he got the timing right, both power and spin came across strongly, especially those ankle-high fast-skidding @#$%^&* unreturnable backhand slices.
- Getting the ideal swingweight and total weight takes several sessions. I advised him to move the lead around and keep trying.
- For the few shots I hit, both spin and power increased significantly from previous setups due to the extra pocketing from the added weight.
- Feel wise, the racket is getting very close to how a traditional ProStaff usually feels like.
- The hoop also seemed to flex less and was a little more stable on off-centre hits.
- String movement was minimal but ball fur adorns the stringbed after playing, as usual, showing how much the strings were biting...
The Head Prestige line has a long history. It was targeted at better player who prefer a heavy and stable racket with impeccable feel.
I strung and played with two Head Prestiges for a friend recently, and he asked if I could post some of my views on this blog.
Head Youtek IG Prestige Mid (link)
The grommets of this racket are capped. It is aesthetically pleasing, but makes stringing a little more challenging with the blocked views of where the holes are.
Before stringing, I wondered how to deal with blocked holes. After some thought, I threaded the outer crosses before tensioning the outer mains so that no holes would be blocked later.
Head Graphene Prestige Rev Pro (link)
Likewise, the crosses were threaded first to avoid the blocked hole.
Playtest:
Prestige Mid
- This racket played very traditional to the Prestige Line.
- Weight was hefty and de-polarized. With the weight quite evenly distributed, I could feel some "resistance" near the throat when swinging.
- Stability was good and comfort even better!
- Although the published stiffness states RA63, it felt much more softer and flexier, especially in the hoop.
- After a few hits with this syn gut strung racket, I felt that a stiffer string or a higher tension should have been used to "tighten" the hoop flex to improve accuracy.
- Power was very low, perhaps worsened by the hoop flex.
- Adding lead tape came to mind immediately, until I realised stock weight was already almost 350g, so there was not that much room to customise.
Prestige Rev Pro
- When I took an "air swing", the first impression was how light and fast this racket was.
- The weight is definitely polarized. So much that the throat felt a little hollow, but it was very fast and super easy to swing. So much so, that my partner kept contacting the ball way too early!
- Despite the open pattern, power was very low. In fact, I felt it was even lower than the Prestige Mid. I cannot understand how the swingweight of this can be 329 kg/cm2 whereas the Prestige Mid's was 317 kg/cm2.
- Flex and comfort felt the same as the Mid.
- Out of curiousity, I taped a 11 grams piece of lead right at 12 o'clock to beef up the power. That brought the swingweight up by about 36 kg/cm2 to a tour pro level of 365 kg/cm2.
- After adding the lead, the stringbed came to life! Power and ball pocketing increased, the racket flexed less and more spin could be generated.
- Surprisingly, even at this ridiculously high level of swingweight, neither my partner nor myself felt that the racket wielded too heavily.
- Another observation was that this racket seemed to play better hitting flat shots. Both with and without the added lead, steep swipes to try to generate more spin yielded poor to average results. Ironically, it was the flatter strokes that threw up more spin. Strange!
- The advantage of this Rev Pro, is the light and polarized weight, offering plenty of room to add lead customisations.
- However, the signature feel of the Prestige line has been completely forsaken. This played totally different from the Mid.
