Countless have restrung only the crosses of a used stringbed successfully.
But I have yet to hear about successful restringing of mains only. A previous post (link) explained why it could not be done.
Then I thought, instead of anchoring the main supports at 12 & 6 o'clock of the racket hoop, would it be possible if mounted at 3 & 9 instead?
That would prevent the crosses from compressing and distorting the frame width once the mains are cut, wouldn't it?
From this perspective, doesn't it seem like the "crosses" were being strung instead?
First 2 pics below was width measurement before the above mains restring. Next 2 pics below was after.
Before:
After:
While the frame width maintained its exact measurement after the mains restring, it is important to note that the width still compressed about 6-7mm from an unstrung state. (The most extreme distortion I witnessed for this frame was a narrowing of about 11-12mm).
Even though the mains did not snap, this warp occurred because tension loss and string creep caused greater elongation in the main strings than the crosses.
Nevertheless, if this works out, I believe there could be huge implications on how rackets could be restrung, as long as one understands and accepts the risks.
Playtest:
- The first impression was how much tighter the mains felt compared to how it last played.
- The mains dominated the feel of ball impacts. It was nice to feel it pocketing and supporting the ball as the stringbed depresses before rebounding accurately.
- Although this sounds odd, but compared to the more commonly felt feeling of the crosses supporting most of the impact, having the mains do the bulk of the work was way better! I enjoyed this tremendously!
- For this to happen, clearly, the crosses have lost a fair bit of string tension. But still, there was no instance of any odd rebound angle nor trampoline.
- If you try to imagine a freshly strung racket with the main strings about 10-15 lbs tighter than the crosses, that's probably how this felt like to me.
- Control and confidence improved. I felt more at ease just taking full relaxed swings instead of holding back with the previous worn main strings.
- String bite, feel and spin improved significantly over the old mains.
- For second serves, both sidespin and topspin curled the ball down much faster than anticipated, causing many to land short, almost right in the middle of my opponent's service box, before kicking up. So we knew spin increased.
- Sweetspot size felt the same. Likewise, shots hit off-sweetspot did not feel more or less harsh, nor extra low-powered.
- Frame width maintained the same after an hour of play.
Every now and then, I receive requests to help repair, restore or restring some vintage frames.
Occasionally, some wanted to test exotic string setups in their rackets.
The most typical remained - vintage frame with damaged/extinct grommets carrying a strong sentimental value.
But strangely, whenever I mentioned the costs needed to get those frames back into playing condition, all of their "sentimental values" dissipated instantly! Poof!
The owner of the Black Ace Micro could not find anyone willing to restring his 22x30 racket. Neither was he willing to learn how to do it himself. He KNEW it was not a simple job!
Knowing my fondness for such rare collectibles, he offered to swap with something of approximate value. Rackets, stringjobs, or other peripherals.
A deal was made and it became my new toy.
From online searches, specs for the Black Ace Micro are:
Tension: 28-42 lbs (string crosses 2 lbs tighter than mains)
String Pattern: 22mains x 30crosses
Start mains at throat, skip 10Bottom & 12Bottom
Start crosses at 10Top
Shared holes: 13T & 13B
Note: Start crosses on side A of grommet strip
Source: USRSA Stringer's Digest
Playtest:
- This was strung at 35 lbs, right at the middle of the recommended tension range.
- Control was impressive. There was a very nice pocketing that rebounded very quickly, like natural gut. It could be due to the extra number of strings in direct contact with the ball.
- Impact was very soft but the strings felt tight and firm.
- There was absolutely nothing to suggest this was pulled at only 35lbs. Tranlated, the tightness would probably play close to about high 40s lbs in my 16x18 ProStaff Classic 6.1.
- I had expected spin to be poor with such a dense pattern. But I was very wrong. Ball bite was very good and spin was very controllable.
- The variance in spin between deliberate high spin and flat shots were greater than with normal 16x19 open patterns.
- Even flat shots were easy to aim and re-direct.
- The flex seemed very low and I could feel the throat bending during impact as it absorbed the power. Not as whippy as a woody, but close. Probably RA 40s?
- Serves were a little challenging. Too much power and the frame would flex, affecting accuracy. So I used a spin serve throughout the game I played.
- Even after about an hour of play, there was zero notching on the fishing line.
After getting tired of the constant need to restring the "snappy" fishing line, I thought of using Kevlar to give myself a "stringing break".
I got hold of a pack of 1.10mm aramid for the mains and paired it up with syn gut.
Playtest:
- Kevlar usually has a break-in period of about an hour or two where it stretches very marginally. Thereafter, it stabilises until it breaks or gets restrung.
- I was looking forward to this but was sorely disappointed. It lasted less than 30 minutes of play before snapping!
- Those 30 minutes played stiff as a board - powerless and spinless.
- I may need to re-test this.
Since the thin fishing lines kept snapping, we decided to try something stronger. The next step up would be Dyneema/ Spectra braided fishing lines.
We selected the pre-stretched spool. Even at 0.6mm, the breaking strength was rated at 150 lbs! So it's thinner and stronger.
In addition, this eight strand braided has a coefficient of friction of only 0.09, which is as slick as the most slippery poly strings we have. Another plus for spin!
Stringing it was challenging, as usual, since it was not designed to be used in a tennis racket. Clamps slippage was the major issue. Nevertheless, I got the job done. Just an extra dose of patience and time was needed.
Take a look how fine the line was at 0.6mm, compared to the 1.25mm syn gut it was paired with.
Playtest:
- Initial hits felt very good. The thin line provided impressive feel with very good bite and spin.
- Shots that I feared hitting out previously were executed with the perfect amount of spin to curl it down instead of flying out.
- Serves could be powerful or spinny depending how I hit it.
- However, the joy was short-lived.
- Despite further pre-stretching before stringing, the dyneema line still elongated a lot with every ball impact.
- After about 50 hits, including several serves, the stringbed became exceptionally loose. "Floppy" would be an appropriate word to describe it.
- Not only that, the hoop warped so much that the width compressed about 1cm or more. Afraid that the frame may crack (since I tensioned it quite high), I snipped the crosses immediately to release the pressure.
- Dyneema is still better reserved for fishing.
All the times that I restrung only the mains did not end up well. Either the stringbed developed heavy vibrations, or there was a sense of loss of control.
Now that I am testing fishing line fervently, and that the thin fishing line snaps so frequently, the question that kept popping up was, "Why not restring only the main strings after it snaps?"
The sole reason is racket warp. Once deformed, a lot of other variables are affected, such as, length, width, swingweight, sweetspot size, sweetspot location, pocketing, and feel.
Take a look for yourself...
On the left below was the freshly strung fishing mains with syn gut. On the right, the fishing mains snapped at two locations after about an hour of play. Compare the shape, length and width of the racket hoop.
In the right picture, the racket hoop has narrowed and lengthened. Since the mains snapped, there was no tension holding together 12 and 6 o'clock anymore. The crosses compressed the hoop at 3 and 9 o'clock together, narrowing the frame.
As soon as I got home, I measured the frame width.
Just like that, the hoop narrowed by 9mm, which was huge!
I tried. No amount of re-tensioning on the mains could restore the frame back to its original shape.
So re-stringing mains only cannot, and should not be done.
