When I first started writing, my only intention was to document my stringing experiments for my own reference.
There was supposed to be an end-date of sorts - a day where I achieved nirvana in my search for the perfect string, racket, tension combination that allowed me to annihilate all my competitors!
Now I know that day will never arrive. This journey would continue...
For those restless string testers who aspire to buy your own stringing machines, be warned that this is a bottomless pit. There is no end to the amount of testings.
To date, about 20 months after my machine arrived, I have used 42 reels of strings. This excludes individual packets or strings provided by friends.
The fun part was I got to try all sorts of stringing patterns my mind could imagine - 16x10, 22x30, 16x17, etc. And pull them at ridiculous tensions from 20+ lbs to 100+ lbs!
Just be prepared, most who buy their own machines end up spending more than getting their sticks strung elsewhere.
Monday 28 July 2014
Thursday 24 July 2014
Friday 18 July 2014
Extending the Racket by ½ Inch
Occasionally, I come across some playing partners who use extended rackets. Some use 27¼", others 27½". The longest I saw was 28".
Under ITF rules, the maximum length allowed is 29" (link).
From my conversation with these folks, they claimed that the extra ¼" or ½" does make a significant difference.
When I tried their rackets, it did feel longer. However, I could not play with them enough to form any conclusion.
Hence, what better way than to mod my own racket!
ProKennex uses an grip pallet system. Many tinkerers have extended their rackets just by sliding the grip pallet down by about ½". So that's what I set out to do too.
Playtest:
- The first impression was the slight increase in swingweight. It was perceptible, but not that much as to hinder the swing. Felt like an extra 5 to 8 swingweight points added.
- After getting used to it in a 20 minutes warm-up, I tried playing a few games to test how it would hold up.
- Serves were good. I could definitely reach up higher and hit the ball higher in the toss. Both my regular playing partner and myself felt that my first serve percentages were better. I hit the net tape less.
- Groundstrokes were where the extra length shined out! When pushed corner to corner, and my lazy bones could not get to the ball fast enough, I just stretched out and reached the ball on several occasions.
- When I had enough time to prepare for the shot, I felt the power level increased. A more relaxed swing was able to deliver the ball equally deep and fast compared to at 27".
- The downside of the extra length was a slower backhand. I could not get the racket back in time. Sometimes, my timing was out, so my weaker wing suffered.
- Volleys demanded a much stronger grip to stabilise the frame. There was a greater tendency to twist.
- After playing three sessions of tennis with it, I felt the pros were not significant enough. And after every session, my forearm ached badly. So I reverted it.
- On hindsight, if I could lower the swingweight slightly, perhaps by about 10 to 15 points, I think the extra ½" would be more palatable. But between extra length and faster footwork, the latter still triumphs.
Under ITF rules, the maximum length allowed is 29" (link).
From my conversation with these folks, they claimed that the extra ¼" or ½" does make a significant difference.
When I tried their rackets, it did feel longer. However, I could not play with them enough to form any conclusion.
Hence, what better way than to mod my own racket!
ProKennex uses an grip pallet system. Many tinkerers have extended their rackets just by sliding the grip pallet down by about ½". So that's what I set out to do too.
Playtest:
- The first impression was the slight increase in swingweight. It was perceptible, but not that much as to hinder the swing. Felt like an extra 5 to 8 swingweight points added.
- After getting used to it in a 20 minutes warm-up, I tried playing a few games to test how it would hold up.
- Serves were good. I could definitely reach up higher and hit the ball higher in the toss. Both my regular playing partner and myself felt that my first serve percentages were better. I hit the net tape less.
- Groundstrokes were where the extra length shined out! When pushed corner to corner, and my lazy bones could not get to the ball fast enough, I just stretched out and reached the ball on several occasions.
- When I had enough time to prepare for the shot, I felt the power level increased. A more relaxed swing was able to deliver the ball equally deep and fast compared to at 27".
- The downside of the extra length was a slower backhand. I could not get the racket back in time. Sometimes, my timing was out, so my weaker wing suffered.
- Volleys demanded a much stronger grip to stabilise the frame. There was a greater tendency to twist.
- After playing three sessions of tennis with it, I felt the pros were not significant enough. And after every session, my forearm ached badly. So I reverted it.
- On hindsight, if I could lower the swingweight slightly, perhaps by about 10 to 15 points, I think the extra ½" would be more palatable. But between extra length and faster footwork, the latter still triumphs.
Wednesday 16 July 2014
Head Graphene Prestige Pro
While hitting with a partner, I noticed he was hesitant and held back from full swings. Most of his strokes were abbreviated and he did not seem committed.
Naturally, his shots became erratic. Some long, some short and many were mishit.
He was using the Head Graphene Prestige Pro (link) strung with a multi/poly hybrid.
After testing it, I was very impressed by the spin prowess! Like the Prestige Rev Pro I tried (link), the weight was heavily polarised. It whips across very easily and quickly for spin.
Since his stringbed was worn and badly notched, he asked if I could restring it with something that would give more control.
I suggested a fullbed of soft poly and he agreed, even though he was initially hesitant, out of fear that his shoulder pain would recur. I assured him it should not.
On his first outing, he was ecstatic! He won a set against someone he usually lost both to. First serve percentages improved as did overall ball directional control.
However, when I played with him a few days later, I still noticed that same reluctance to take full swings. Although his directional control, depth and ball placement was better than before, but it still felt incomplete.
He suggested we swap sticks to play a set and we did. After three games, I found the problem.
Originally, this racket came with a leather grip. He removed it and used just two overgrips. Other than the gripsize becoming way too small for his hands (I measured his recommended gripsizing to be 4¾ inches), the racket balance went haywire!
For extremely polarised frames, very small changes in weight can have drastic effects in swing timings and control.
The leather grip probably weighed 25 grams. Each overgrip weighs about 5 grams. So, almost 15 grams was removed from the handle. Balance point would have moved up between 10-15mm!
As a result, the racket head moved too fast. It became a case of the racket swinging his hands instead of him controlling the racket!
Any wonder why he was hesitant to take full swings?
According to him, after replacing the leather grip, it played much better.
Naturally, his shots became erratic. Some long, some short and many were mishit.
He was using the Head Graphene Prestige Pro (link) strung with a multi/poly hybrid.
After testing it, I was very impressed by the spin prowess! Like the Prestige Rev Pro I tried (link), the weight was heavily polarised. It whips across very easily and quickly for spin.
Since his stringbed was worn and badly notched, he asked if I could restring it with something that would give more control.
I suggested a fullbed of soft poly and he agreed, even though he was initially hesitant, out of fear that his shoulder pain would recur. I assured him it should not.
On his first outing, he was ecstatic! He won a set against someone he usually lost both to. First serve percentages improved as did overall ball directional control.
However, when I played with him a few days later, I still noticed that same reluctance to take full swings. Although his directional control, depth and ball placement was better than before, but it still felt incomplete.
He suggested we swap sticks to play a set and we did. After three games, I found the problem.
Originally, this racket came with a leather grip. He removed it and used just two overgrips. Other than the gripsize becoming way too small for his hands (I measured his recommended gripsizing to be 4¾ inches), the racket balance went haywire!
For extremely polarised frames, very small changes in weight can have drastic effects in swing timings and control.
The leather grip probably weighed 25 grams. Each overgrip weighs about 5 grams. So, almost 15 grams was removed from the handle. Balance point would have moved up between 10-15mm!
As a result, the racket head moved too fast. It became a case of the racket swinging his hands instead of him controlling the racket!
Any wonder why he was hesitant to take full swings?
According to him, after replacing the leather grip, it played much better.
Friday 11 July 2014
What About Tennis Balls?
In soccer, the official match ball undergoes regular updates. The most recent ball received an aerodynamic change that initially baffled quite a few players about its flight path. (link1)(link2)
In golf, ball manufacturers are always tweaking the dimple size, patterns and density to make it fly further and straighter and make it land softer. (link)
But what about the tennis ball?
Despite having more rules governing tennis balls than strings, we still see a huge plethora of different types of balls.
Some have thicker felt while others are denser. Some diameters are very slightly larger and a gram or two heavier. And the most commonly discussed was how they played - stiff, comfortable or mushy.
But not many pay attention to how fast the tennis ball deteriorates during play.
Let me recount an interesting incident.
A young chap contacted me and asked if I could help or teach him how to check a freshly strung stringjob. What should he lookout for? How does he know if it was consistent and well done?
From our conversation, I could tell he was very committed to the game and undergoes regular coaching sessions and matches.
He handed me two freshly strung rackets with gut/poly and told me where it was done. I know the stringer. He does an excellent job. I checked the stringbed frequency, hoop length and width, knots, stringing patterns and others like string burn and grommet wear. Everything was perfect.
His chief gripe was very rapid loss of control. Then I asked about the type of balls he used. Mostly, it's fresh from the can slazenger wimbledon ultra vis. Sounded good to me until I found out their regular singles tennis sessions lasted 3 to 4 hours.
With ONE can of new balls.
In pro matches, balls are changed every 9 games (link). That's approximately 20 to 30 minutes of hitting. Even if we do not hit as hard as pros, I thought 3 to 4 hours was excessive.
Sometimes his partner brings a different brand, so I got him to set aside one of each type of ball after one hour of play, and pass it to me. In a single four hours session, they used four different cans of balls for an hour each.
Then I did a simple compression test for all the balls.
Ball/Diameter Before/Diameter compressed under 10kg
A/59/44
B/62/48
C/62/52
D/62/50
Only ball C passed the bounce test (about 56") when dropped from 100" (link). The rest bounced between 45" to 50".
Since the stringbed returns about 95% of the power and tennis ball returns about 55% (link), a flat and soft ball would compress more during impact with the strings and absorb more power compared to a fresh ball.
And when this player saw his balls landing shorter, he swung much harder which led to his "loss of control". Nothing to do with my friend's excellent stringjob!
For those who are keen, I just found out from an article that Slazengers seem to have a very wide variance in performance when fresh and after play. Compare the purple line for Slazenger in the 3rd and 2nd chart from the bottom. (link)
In contrast, Dunlop and Penn balls seem to last pretty well after play.
In golf, ball manufacturers are always tweaking the dimple size, patterns and density to make it fly further and straighter and make it land softer. (link)
But what about the tennis ball?
Despite having more rules governing tennis balls than strings, we still see a huge plethora of different types of balls.
Some have thicker felt while others are denser. Some diameters are very slightly larger and a gram or two heavier. And the most commonly discussed was how they played - stiff, comfortable or mushy.
But not many pay attention to how fast the tennis ball deteriorates during play.
Let me recount an interesting incident.
A young chap contacted me and asked if I could help or teach him how to check a freshly strung stringjob. What should he lookout for? How does he know if it was consistent and well done?
From our conversation, I could tell he was very committed to the game and undergoes regular coaching sessions and matches.
He handed me two freshly strung rackets with gut/poly and told me where it was done. I know the stringer. He does an excellent job. I checked the stringbed frequency, hoop length and width, knots, stringing patterns and others like string burn and grommet wear. Everything was perfect.
His chief gripe was very rapid loss of control. Then I asked about the type of balls he used. Mostly, it's fresh from the can slazenger wimbledon ultra vis. Sounded good to me until I found out their regular singles tennis sessions lasted 3 to 4 hours.
With ONE can of new balls.
In pro matches, balls are changed every 9 games (link). That's approximately 20 to 30 minutes of hitting. Even if we do not hit as hard as pros, I thought 3 to 4 hours was excessive.
Sometimes his partner brings a different brand, so I got him to set aside one of each type of ball after one hour of play, and pass it to me. In a single four hours session, they used four different cans of balls for an hour each.
Then I did a simple compression test for all the balls.
Ball/Diameter Before/Diameter compressed under 10kg
A/59/44
B/62/48
C/62/52
D/62/50
Only ball C passed the bounce test (about 56") when dropped from 100" (link). The rest bounced between 45" to 50".
Since the stringbed returns about 95% of the power and tennis ball returns about 55% (link), a flat and soft ball would compress more during impact with the strings and absorb more power compared to a fresh ball.
And when this player saw his balls landing shorter, he swung much harder which led to his "loss of control". Nothing to do with my friend's excellent stringjob!
For those who are keen, I just found out from an article that Slazengers seem to have a very wide variance in performance when fresh and after play. Compare the purple line for Slazenger in the 3rd and 2nd chart from the bottom. (link)
In contrast, Dunlop and Penn balls seem to last pretty well after play.
Tuesday 8 July 2014
Strings Quality Control
A few friends whom I string for regularly usually keeps a reel or two with me.
Right after playing with a fresh stringjob, this friend called and asked if I had changed anything, or pranked him (link).
I assured him I did not and did exactly what he instructed. But he claimed the strings played very differently.
My stringing mentor used to say, "When in doubt, check EVERYTHING!" So I did:
- Correct strings used --> ok
- Racket dimensions before and after stringing --> ok
- Clamps slippage --> ok
- Dropweight tension alignment --> ok
- Tension settings --> ok
He claimed the strings played a little dead, like it was over-tensioned.
So I asked:
- Did he leave the newly strung racket in a parked car?
- Did he change to a different brand of tennis balls?
- Was he playing in a different tennis court?
- Was he playing with different partners?
Strangely, everything was the same. Even his regular buddies commented how poorly he delivered all his shots that session!
Then I checked the strings. It was from a new reel he just bought from a very reputable online shop, exactly the same source as the previous reel. So it seemed legit.
Everything appeared in order when comparing the logos, fonts, packaging, string colour, texture, etc.
Out of curiousity, I measured the string diameter and found it 0.03mm thinner than the leftovers from the previous reel! Aha!
Samples of both were cut out, labelled carefully and tested for its elongation properties on the stringing machine, like this.
Then the answer came!
At the same tension, both fresh pieces of string differed in their stretch by almost 20%. This is a huge difference by itself, and together with the 0.03mm thinner diameter, it could totally be passed off as an another string!
Either the QC was off, or the string factory had labelled and packaged the strings wrongly. Or the formula was tweaked!
If you check online forums, this seemed to happen once in a while. Reports of different coloured strings playing differently were more common.
To save on shipping, my friend bought 3 reels of this premium string. The total amount spent was more than enough to pay for three brand new Babolat rackets!
Thankfully, after sending photos of the diameter discrepancy, the shop offered to grant a full refund via credits, less shipping. The downside was, the 3 reels must be shipped back at our costs.
As for me, it was a great relief to be vindicated.
Right after playing with a fresh stringjob, this friend called and asked if I had changed anything, or pranked him (link).
I assured him I did not and did exactly what he instructed. But he claimed the strings played very differently.
My stringing mentor used to say, "When in doubt, check EVERYTHING!" So I did:
- Correct strings used --> ok
- Racket dimensions before and after stringing --> ok
- Clamps slippage --> ok
- Dropweight tension alignment --> ok
- Tension settings --> ok
He claimed the strings played a little dead, like it was over-tensioned.
So I asked:
- Did he leave the newly strung racket in a parked car?
- Did he change to a different brand of tennis balls?
- Was he playing in a different tennis court?
- Was he playing with different partners?
Strangely, everything was the same. Even his regular buddies commented how poorly he delivered all his shots that session!
Then I checked the strings. It was from a new reel he just bought from a very reputable online shop, exactly the same source as the previous reel. So it seemed legit.
Everything appeared in order when comparing the logos, fonts, packaging, string colour, texture, etc.
Out of curiousity, I measured the string diameter and found it 0.03mm thinner than the leftovers from the previous reel! Aha!
Samples of both were cut out, labelled carefully and tested for its elongation properties on the stringing machine, like this.
Then the answer came!
At the same tension, both fresh pieces of string differed in their stretch by almost 20%. This is a huge difference by itself, and together with the 0.03mm thinner diameter, it could totally be passed off as an another string!
Either the QC was off, or the string factory had labelled and packaged the strings wrongly. Or the formula was tweaked!
If you check online forums, this seemed to happen once in a while. Reports of different coloured strings playing differently were more common.
To save on shipping, my friend bought 3 reels of this premium string. The total amount spent was more than enough to pay for three brand new Babolat rackets!
Thankfully, after sending photos of the diameter discrepancy, the shop offered to grant a full refund via credits, less shipping. The downside was, the 3 reels must be shipped back at our costs.
As for me, it was a great relief to be vindicated.
Wednesday 2 July 2014
Optimal Tensioning?
After a friendly game, a teenager was asking how to fine-tune his string tension after deciding his preferred strings.
He was aware of the adage "String loose for power and tight for control", but did not know how to make adjustments.
My answer was simple:
Generally, the tennis game can be grouped under four categories:
(1) serve,
(2) return of serve,
(3) groundstrokes, and
(4) net play.
The real challenge was that, regardless of string type, each of those categories performed best at slightly different tensions.
So it's more of WHICH aspect of his game he needed help with. Or, was a particular style of play from any opponent giving him troubles.
Stringing very tight would help with his first serve's accuracy and return of serves for both first and second serves. But he might lose some spin for second serves and groundstrokes. So some angles and placements would be cut off. Touch shots would be challenging, or could even feel dead.
If his strategy was on using heavy spin on both serves for an opponent that he knew could not handle spin, then low tension could do wonders! Even better, if he charge forward after his spin serves to volley and finish the point early. That would avoid any potential high rebound or loss of control issues with his groundstrokes from the baseline. Best used for opponents who struggle returning spinny shots and have a tendency for weak/short returns.
Since he has multiple similar rackets, was not a string breaker, and could well afford to test strings, I even recommended different setups for different sticks! That would cover a wider spectrum of different opponents he may not have played with.
Yes, there would be adjustment issues when changing rackets. But so far, I observed that all who tried my unconventional setups, took mere minutes to acclimatize.
For an average Joe, say ntrp 3.5, that would probably cost him about 1 to 1½ games at most. Never the entire set, unless he was already struggling against a much stronger player.
Plus, the abrupt change ALWAYS seemed to rile up the opponent more! After reading, analysing and understanding your pace, spin, movement, placement, etc, you messed up the variables again!
Just take note this is no replacement for hard work and training. Only an enhancement. An unorthodox one.
He was aware of the adage "String loose for power and tight for control", but did not know how to make adjustments.
My answer was simple:
Generally, the tennis game can be grouped under four categories:
(1) serve,
(2) return of serve,
(3) groundstrokes, and
(4) net play.
The real challenge was that, regardless of string type, each of those categories performed best at slightly different tensions.
So it's more of WHICH aspect of his game he needed help with. Or, was a particular style of play from any opponent giving him troubles.
Stringing very tight would help with his first serve's accuracy and return of serves for both first and second serves. But he might lose some spin for second serves and groundstrokes. So some angles and placements would be cut off. Touch shots would be challenging, or could even feel dead.
If his strategy was on using heavy spin on both serves for an opponent that he knew could not handle spin, then low tension could do wonders! Even better, if he charge forward after his spin serves to volley and finish the point early. That would avoid any potential high rebound or loss of control issues with his groundstrokes from the baseline. Best used for opponents who struggle returning spinny shots and have a tendency for weak/short returns.
Since he has multiple similar rackets, was not a string breaker, and could well afford to test strings, I even recommended different setups for different sticks! That would cover a wider spectrum of different opponents he may not have played with.
Yes, there would be adjustment issues when changing rackets. But so far, I observed that all who tried my unconventional setups, took mere minutes to acclimatize.
For an average Joe, say ntrp 3.5, that would probably cost him about 1 to 1½ games at most. Never the entire set, unless he was already struggling against a much stronger player.
Plus, the abrupt change ALWAYS seemed to rile up the opponent more! After reading, analysing and understanding your pace, spin, movement, placement, etc, you messed up the variables again!
Just take note this is no replacement for hard work and training. Only an enhancement. An unorthodox one.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)