Cutting Down Racket Length

 

With Covid-19 still raging, especially the Delta variant, many are staying home voluntarily despite full vaccinations. 

Work-from-home remains the default in Singapore. 

Probably because of this, a lot of my old friends picked up tennis. A former colleague, now in his 70s and retired, pursued tennis rigorously. Taking lessons twice a week and playing another two more days with his wife. 

We caught up and played. He used an oversized head-heavy racket recommended by his coach. 

And I noticed the strain on his face as he struggled with his timing on every forehand shot. He thought that was normal and how tennis ought to be played. His coach commended his strokes. 

When I took his racket back for measurements and restring, I was shocked! 

His second hand racket had been modified previously. At 28 inches long, it weighed 297 grams with a balance of 36.5cm and a swingweight of 381 kg/cm2! 

Despite removing all the lead tape I could find, it remained too head-heavy. I suggested to cut down by half-inch for a start and he agreed. 

Some weight was added in the handle end to rebalance. The old kevlar/synthetic gut was cut and restrung with full poly at about 40 lbs using proportional stringing. 

He loved it from the first hit! 

"So easy!" he exclaimed! 

Longer is not always better. The specs has to be within his strength ability. He immediately sent in his wife's racket to be re-worked too. 

 

 

 

Warped Hoop - Head Gravity

The recently launched Head Gravity series of tennis rackets are really soft and arm friendly. 

This rare flex got many players on board, especially previous users of the Babolat Pure Drives and Aero Pros.

However, their feedback has been mixed. Some loved the Gravity while many others hated its inconsistency and lack of accuracy.

In stock form, I find the power and stability lacking.

However, it is the incredibly soft hoop that poses the biggest problems. It is almost as soft as the old but very popular Head Prestige.

Maintaining hoop shape while stringing this Gravity is challenging. I received so many badly warped hoops that rendered the racket unplayable.

Take a look yourself at the three videos below...

The stringjob in this first video was done by another stringer. You can see the Head logo stenciled. The hoop was approximately 24.8cm wide.

In the second video below, the hoop width was approximately 25.3cm after the strings were cut and removed.

 

 
The third video showed the width to be almost exactly 25.3cm after I restrung it. No stencil. Almost zero distortion.

Naturally, the player loved the distortion free stringjob.

If you have a Head Gravity playing inconsistently, it could be the stringing. Try measuring the hoop width without and with strings.

PS: Sorry about the lousy video quality...somehow it deteriorated after uploading
 



   

Warped Hoop - Wilson Blade 104 (2013)

Almost all soft hoops rackets sent in to me were strung warped by their stringers.

This Blade 104 has a very soft flex of RA59.

The one with red strings was strung by me about a week ago. The one with black strings was strung by something else. 

The one with black strings has its hoop widened by 5mm. That is a lot!

Both rackets inside hoop width were 26.1cm when strings were cut.

Videos below...

    

Wilson Clash Customization

The latest Wilson Clash seemed interesting. 

Marketing generated so much hype that even during pre-launch in late 2018, I received many questions from players about its potential to up their game.

It did not take long before both versions were sent in to me for stringing and modifications.

I had a few hits with some that were sent to me strung. Surprisingly, many were strung with poly/multi or full multi. Few were with full poly. 

Dampener or not, the feel was very muted yet included a lot of buzz and trembling. This felt exactly like "hoop wobble" (link). Immediately, this hinted a potentially very soft hoop. Extra care needed when stringing. 

When lacing up the centre main, what struck me was how big the modern grommet holes were. Every hole was large enough to be a tie-off hole. That made threading strings very easy.

My earlier suspicions were confirmed when tensioning the mains. Previous soft hoops I worked on warped more when outer mains like 6, 7 or 8 were tensioned. The Clash started warping significantly from inner mains like 3, 4 and 5. That is a very significant change and carries huge implications.

Crosses start very high and have smaller gaps near 12 o'clock. These gaps almost double near the last few bottom crosses. Another hint of potential erratic stringbed response especially nearer the top quarter or top third which most professional players like to contact the ball at.

When weaving the crosses, the gaps kept reminding me of the earlier Burn series. It was so wide it created control issues for many. And those that could somehow control the ball snapped strings too quickly. Would this happen with the Clash open gaps? (I was later updated by several their strings notched extra fast in the Clash compared to their own 16x19 stringbeds)

As I examined the throat area, I noticed a notched recessed area inside the throat. (Somewhere beside the "o" and "n" of the red "Wilson" wordings) This must be where the racket is flexing on impact. Interesting. Few rackets I can think of, other than wood, flex at such a low and faraway point away from impact point.

Not long after, another Clash came in. Brand new unstrung. For very heavy customizations for a touring professional.

Armed with the feedback from the earlier few Clashes, I took up the challenge. 

It was a challenge because the Clash was marketed as a very powerful frame. Many complained of timing issues and erratic hot spots on the stringbed. And it had very open strings coupled with a very soft flex of about 55. All these pointed to control issues.

To add power or weight meant doubling up on these control problems.

Nevertheless, I did the calculations and it all added up nicely. So I proceeded.

First step, strip the grommets.

Now that you see how much lead tape I am adding, can you understand why I said it was a challenge to add control and keep the ball in? For a professional full time tennis player!

(I scribbled on the lead tape too!)

Grommet installation was very very easy. Took me about 4 seconds. Fastest I have ever reinstalled top grommets after adding lead tape.

For this ease of reinstallation, I have to thank Wilson for this modern grommet design. The centre pieces always cause the biggest obstructions. So they cleverly separated the centre 10 grommets from the bumper guard. And the drilling featured extra large holes for easy grommet installation. Well done Wilson!! And thank you!!

Typical of a new unstrung before racket, the grommets need to be seated properly to ensure a playable string job. Look at the red circles area below, compare the properly seated grommet with the "unseated" one.

Do not assume this happens automatically when you pull tension. I have several strung frames sent in to me with the grommets still "unseated".
 

Until now I do not understand why so many are enamored and mesmerized by silicone in the butt. Everyone I customize for asked for it!

Final checks before handing the frame over to the player. So far the hoop size QC seems very consistent. All Clash and Clash Tour I worked on measured 326mm length and 251mm width for the inside hoop from base of grommet to base of grommet. Zero hoop distortion achieved.

PS: No details of racket weights, specs nor string tensions would be revealed as these players are still actively competing. So please do not ask. 






    

Apologies for my absence...

Sometime late last year, I visited a tennis string factory. 

During the visit, a series of introductions acquainted me with some folks from the industry. That includes other manufacturers, suppliers, and also some professional players and their coaches.

What happened was, in his group chat for sponsored players, the factory manager touted I had some fancy stringing (proportional stringing) that could make the stringbed play vastly superior. 

That brought some to drop by the factory very very quickly! At their repeated request, I ended up agreeing to string three rackets for three different players so they could try it themselves.

I was unprepared for this. I had to work the calculations off my tiny phone screen, struggle with an unfamiliar stringing machine, and weaved with stiff frozen fingers due to the cold and dry weather. 

I was so relieved when the rackets were completed. 

That relief turned into joy when I started seeing these players grin, followed by shock and amazement after they had hit some balls with those three rackets.

Over the last few months, I have met and worked with almost the entire squad. Coaches and some parents included.

That explains why I was unable to write. After I settle the remaining players, hopefully, I can post more about my experiences and learnings. 

As usual, no names would be revealed as these are still actively competing players. And whatever I can share would first be subject to their approval.




     

Head Prestige Tour 660

To many racket connoiseurs, the made in Austria Head Prestige Tour 660 is very difficult to string properly.

The challenge stems from its very soft flex and hoop which distorts very easily.

Not my preferred racket to work on too. Many extra precautions to adopt. But, once in a while, I like challenges...

Strung with full poly strings.

New stringjob with full poly on the left while old stringjob with the stenciled head logo on the right. Both done one-piece.

Seems to me the old stringjob compressed the frame narrower.

When I checked my unstrung and strung hoop distortion, mine was out by 0.5mm. Not too bad. I'll take it!

In case you missed it, here's a previous experiment I did with my friends on stringing very flexy frames:

Racket Flex and String Tension Preference

The proud owner of this PT660 couldn't wait to take it out for a game!




     

Oldie: 1970s Head Master Aluminium

After decades of hearing from his old man on how well the old aluminium stick played, a young chap finally dusted off his dad's old racket and asked if I could restring it.

"With full poly", he asked.

I always have a thing for oldies, such as:
My 30+ Years Old Slazenger Woody
Another 30+ Years Old Racket By Head
Oldie: Yonex R-10
Yonex Couguss II
Exploding Woody - 1980s Slazenger Vilas

So I accepted after the usual disclaimers and upfront payment.

I'll let the pics do the talking...

I had a session with the chap. The racket was very flexible and comfy. Despite it's strung and gripped total weight of about 380 grams, it was not that difficult to whip this around. 

Even serves were good! I managed an out-wide ace!

Strangely, with a head size of probably 60+ sq inches, coupled with a dense 18x18 string pattern, the string gaps were still large enough to generate more than enough spin to match today's spin effect sticks! I attribute that to the soft flex and heavy swingweight. (link)

The young chap did not fancy this racket, so he traded it with me for something else he liked. 

Glad to add another nice find to my collection!




     

Replicating an ATP Top Ten Professional Racket Specs

Through an introduction from someone I have worked with, I met a chap who claimed to be a ntrp 4.5-5.0 player and needed some help.

Everytime I hear about someone's self-rated ntrp rating, it was always inflated. So I took it with a pinch of salt.

We met for coffee.

He requested for anonymity so I cannot post too much details. I'll call him "RX".

In a nutshell, RX was a college player who dabbled in several futures tournaments. He trained and played through pain, and is now paying the price with recurring tennis elbow. 

Surprisingly, he has never heard of ProKennex rackets. And the racket manufacturer's claim that it helps with tennis elbow! 

If you missed the test report by the professor from Massachusetts Institute of Technology, it was quite impressive! (link)

The question RX kept asking was whether this comfort-oriented racket could perform for a high level player. Other than Andreas Seppi, he could not google anyone else using a ProKennex on tour. 

RX was not the first, nor the only high-level player asking me that question. So I had expected it.

Ultimately, there was only one way to find out. RX gave me his racket specs and asked if I would be willing to modify one of my ProKennex to his exact specs. Then let him test. He offered to bear all materials cost plus labour.

I accepted. 

What intrigued me was that his specs was similar to a current ATP top ten male player. I have always wondered how would such a stick wield. How could I turn away this chance to kill two birds with one stone? And I still get to keep my racket after!!!

If you are a hardcore follower of tour pro's racket specs, you will know there are only three variables that determine every other aspect of the racket.

RX allowed me to share only one digit from each of the three variables. See if you can make any sense out of it:
x6x
x5x
x2x

Here's some pics of the process...

Added three layers of lead tape under the bumper in above pic.

Added three layers of lead tape inside throat grommets.

Can still see the thick layers of lead tape after replacing the throat grommet.

This was the peek inside the butt before some silicone and lead was inserted. If you are attempting this, please remove the rusty staples first.

These were just a part of the changes made. There were others that I agreed to keep confidential.

When all was completed, I went to RX's apartment for a playtest with his hitting partner. I observed.

As RX was here on holiday and recuperating from his tennis elbow, he was a little rusty. His timing was off for some difficult shots. But during co-operative hitting, I was amazed at his consistency, depth, direction and spin. It looked so effortless!

It rained last night so I could see the ball marks where his shots landed. For that co-operative hitting, I could fit 90% of his shots within a 4 ft by 4 ft square! And they were not pushing, blocking nor dinking the ball!

Search youtube for tour pro practice videos. That's how it looked like. Very humbling for a hacker like me. With their kind of pace and spin, I would not have lasted more than 3-4 shots in their usual 15-20 shots rallies.

And the sound of their ball impacts were loud and crisp. The ball crushing came with loud distinct pops.

Then they played a match while I sat miserably staring at my phone.

Almost two hours and very little pain or discomfort. I could see RX was back to swinging the racket freely. He was no longer held back by pain, nor fear of pain. 

When I had my chance later, the racket was quite maneuverable. Heavy but not completely unwieldy. Not as difficult to use as I had imagined it to be. I liked the plowthrough and stability!

Thanks RX, I enjoyed working with you and have learnt much too!


     

Update to No More Tennis Elbow!!!

Here is "F's" stiff RA 70s flex, over-sized, head-heavy, light-weight racket restrung with full poly! (link)

Quite unheard of for someone with tennis elbow!

And a very thin gauge to add plenty of feel and ball bite.



     

No More Tennis Elbow!!!

About 18 months after modifying the racket for a tennis elbow sufferer (link), this friend "F", handed me another racket to try to make it "similarly comfortable".

With the initial modified stick, "F" enjoyed 18 months of pain free tennis. Hard hitting singles, doubles, volleys, serves and swing volleys could again be executed without pain, nor fear of pain.

It seems "F" was playing so much that a backup stick is now necessary.

My point is, some may experience pain or discomfort due to their technique. Some due to equipment. But if you really enjoy the game so much, why live with the pain? 

Usually a technique change, or re-hab, or equipment change can mitigate the problem. Talk to your stringer to find a solution.

Here's the newly matched specs for "F".

Apparently, two weeks after matching up the rackets and handing it back to "F", "F" is now requesting for a full poly setup in the rackets!

To me, that was a sure sign that the equipment was the culprit in her case of tennis elbow!



     

Racket Cleanliness

After 18 months of incessant testing of new strings, an old friend, PK (link), got in touch again. He wanted to try proportional stringing with full poly. (link)

So he handed me his Babolat APD which he bought used, for a very good deal. However, the racket was so dirty.

Perhaps ingrained by my mentor many many years ago, I instinctively cleaned up the frame using an old toothbrush and rag.

Then I inspected the racket. And found two hairline cracks at the throat area, previously buried under all the dirt and grime. It doesn't show up well in the pics below, but yes, they are cracks.

Could this be why my mentor always insisted I clean rackets before working on them? I have no idea. Neither any way to check with him now.

After obtaining the green light to proceed from PK, I cut out the old strings, measured all the variables, then started work.

To me, it sure felt better working on a clean racket. The more important lesson though, is to always check used frames carefully before buying them. Clean them first if possible.

Fortunately, the cracks are very minor. It should remain playable for a good while more.

Playtest:
- After playing with it for 3 hours with his regular partners, PK was full of praise for proportional stringing. 
- In his words, he wrote:

"Yo, here is my verdict. Spin, power, comfort and control were all superb..."

- And this was what he wrote about what his playing partners commented:

"They say the spin control really good" and "A lot of pace".

- Downside was he felt he needed to make some adjustments to his grip, swing and serve. But overall, he was very satisfied.
- I replied that I had expected the adjustments because the spin-to-power ratio of this setup was very different from his regular setup of full poly. If he felt no difference and needed no changes, then why should I spend SO MUCH more time stringing his racket proportionately?
- Somehow, I get the feeling that PK is going to be asking ONLY for proportional stringing from now on...




     

Shoulder Pain

A friend of a playing partner, EC, has been suffering from shoulder pain, especially during serves.

EC is in his late-30s, been enjoying tennis for a few years and has received some coaching before. My initial impressions of him from the first few rally hits was that he is very well-built and a big, strong hitter.

When he showed me his bruises from his TCM massage therapy (link) for his upper right arm and shoulder pain, I was surprised.

Then I noticed he was using the Wilson BLX Tour Limited (link). The specs (reproduced from link):

As usual, most pay attention only to total weight when buying rackets and 315 grams strung sounds really comfortable. 

Until one looks at the very stiff flex of RA73, extended length of 27.5", high balance point of 34 cm and a very high swingweight of 345! 

The extended length would add about another 10+ SW points to make it play closer to 355-360! That is close to, or more than what is speculated online to be Federer's and Djokovic's racket swingweights!

Really reminds me of:
Swingweight Addiction
Mysterious Arm Pain

To make matters worse, it was strung tight with thick 16 gauge full poly! Now that would be amazing if his arm didn't hurt!

Even his backup racket, a Blade 98 (18x20)(link) was not very forgiving with 16 gauge full poly tightly strung too. Although much more arm "friendlier" at 27 inches, RA 64 and SW of 335, but how many recreational players can load 16 gauge full poly in a dense 18x20 stringbed? Not to mention it was dead poly.

So I suggested good old synthetic gut...

EC added a few layers of overgrips and inadvertently added some comfort by moving the balance a little lower. That also beefed up the weight to absorb some nasty vibes. His chief gripe, was still the dead, powerless, lifeless strings.

The full poly strings weighed 18 grams.

A full bed of synthetic gut weighs only 14 grams. That 4 grams difference reduced the swingweight by approximately 8 SW points. That is significant!

Another major difference is the greater elasticity of syn gut would allow EC to load the strings better, have greater dampening and a lot more power than full poly. EC could swing the racket easier now rather than forcing every shot.

Hopefully, with some rotator cuff exercises (link) I got him to do, and the much softer synthetic gut stringbed, his shoulder and arm would get better. 

In case you missed this great article written by Toby, I think it is worth a read:
http://unorthodoxstringing.blogspot.sg/2015/01/why-i-dont-like-poly.html

Play safe to enjoy tennis longer!




     

Signum Pro Poly Plasma (SPPP)

Someone whom I string for became curious about this string. He gave me a few sets and asked for my opinion in return.

It was strange that he asked me, a known non-lover of poly (link), to help him assess the strings.

Online reviews have been mixed. Some claim SPPP plays soft and comfortable, while others felt it played stiff and dead. Many suggested tensioning it really low, like low-mid 40s lbs since the tension holding was very good.

After examining the string and taking some measurements, I decided to do up a full bed using proportional stringing (link) averaging about 48 lbs. I need all the power and comfort I can get...

Initial Impressions
- This is a stiff poly with very good tension holding indeed.
- The texture was not as slick as newer polys but neither is it rough nor textured. Just round.
- Most other polys would "slip" through my fingers as I weaved, but this string did not. So I figured the "ball bite" friction should be good for this string.
- Overnight, tension by frequency dropped only about 15 hz, which was impressive since most polys I tried loses about 40+ hz overnight unplayed.

Warm Up Rallies
- Only a very slight softening was felt after half an hour.
- Power was low and pocketing was minimal.
- An abnormally large number of shots hit the tape on the net. To me, this was another indication of its low power and correspondingly, a very low angle of rebound. Most of my shots normally clear the net two to three feet above.
- Control was decent but I struggled with spin. As a result, when I tried to step up the pace, the ball flew long.

Game Play
- Serves were very easy to place due to the tight stringbed. While I could hit down the "T" or out wide quite often, the pace was significantly slower than with other poly strings I used. 
- From my side, the serve did not feel offensive enough. I preferred a little more power, so I reduced the spin and hit flatter serves. Then it looked better.
- Return of serves revealed something very interesting to me. When contacted right at the sweetspot, ball impacts felt exceptionally nice, soft, comfy and powerful. But the ball flew long. Not up, but low and long. Even with follow-throughs above my shoulder.
- I noticed the same problem when returning very hard flat shots from my partner. "Trampoline" came to my mind. But only dead centre on the sweetspot. Other areas felt flat and stiff.
- This "trampoline" effect could be due to string loading, string timing and racket timing. Hard incoming shots, like serves, added a lot of "punch" to the stringbed, even with my compact swings. 
- This loaded both the strings and the very flexy racket. However, there was a huge rebound timing difference between the strings and the racket, resulting in this "loss of control" feeling. Since I cannot adjust the racket flex, I need to fine tune the tension to minimize this timing gap (link).
- With almost any poly, volleys and touch shots were dead. No exception with SPPP. Totally devoid of feel and feedback even with full proportional stringing. So dead I kept volleying easy shots into the net or out long!
- Long-drawn points were disadvantageous to me since I realized the string and racket flex timings were totally out. Neither could I rely on topspin as I either could not load the strings, or I ended up hitting too clean on the sweetspot. Again, the result was either into the net or out long.
- I found it was very difficult to play with this setup. But keep in mind, I have always preferred syn gut.

Overall
- To me, the greatest strength of this string was also it's worst flaw: tension holding.
- I doubt it was the ingredients. Highly suspect this string was heavily prestretched in the factory, hence its impeccable tension stability, both overnight after stringing and after the initial session of play.
- If it was indeed prestretched, it should have been indicated on the packaging. Then I would have strung this completely differently. Discovering, or suspecting this after stringing it up was very disappointing.
- That said, all was not lost. To those very hard-hitters looking for tension stable polys, or to tame very powerful stiff rackets, this string would be an exceptionally good fit. Just a straight-up full bed somewhere in the mid-40s to mid-50s lbs would suffice.
- If I were to try this string again, I would probably go for 40 lbs or less. That's how meek my swing is!