Thanks for visiting us!

Badminton Central is a free community for fans of badminton! If you find anything useful here please consider registering to see more content and get involved with our great community users, it takes less than 15 seconds! Everybody is welcome here.

Click here for a FREE account!

Skipping a hole to go into it anyway later

Discussion in 'Badminton Stringing Techniques & Tools' started by merciadriluca, Feb 24, 2013.

  1. merciadriluca

    merciadriluca Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2012
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Univ. Eng. Student
    Location:
    Liège
    Hello,

    In many stringing patterns, for mains, it is said to skip a given hole, and to go into it some strings after. I presume it is like that to maintain a more constant stringing tension through the whole string's life, but I'm not sure. Or it might simply be to be closer to the one you will tie off at.

    Can someone tell me more about this?

    Example:
    2746.jpg
    (source: http://www.yonex.com/_assets/images/cache/autoxauto/2746.jpg). It is said `keep on stringing until B9. Go through B12 and [...] and down to B10.'

    Thanks.
     
  2. Fidget

    Fidget Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2008
    Messages:
    3,303
    Likes Received:
    46
    Occupation:
    something far too busy for my badminton needs
    Location:
    Canada
    That is the standard Yonex pattern for 2 piece stringing.
    You are correct in that it is designed to hold tension, put less stress on the outer most sides of the frame and give you a shorter distance to your tie-off grommet.

    You don't have to follow Yonex instructions if you don't want to, though.
    I strung a Babolat today whose instructions advised working the mains straight out, without backtracking. Finishes at B12 and ties off at B7. Seemed like a long way for that loose end to go.
     
  3. merciadriluca

    merciadriluca Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2012
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Univ. Eng. Student
    Location:
    Liège
    Thanks for the answer. Well, if I remember correctly, a problem I sometimes encounter is that, following this exact recommendation, I am stuck. Why? Because until B9 everything is great. Next, you go B12, end at A11. Then, you want to string this one (the one from B12 to A11). Good idea, but using flying clamps, you need a second string close to B12-A11; such a string would e.g. be B10-A10, however you had to skip that one. As a result, you cannot string B12-A11.

    No problem, you might think: you continue from A11, and go A10, then B10. Okay, you will now string these two ones at a time, putting the flying clamp in the bottom.

    However, you suddenly realize your string is `too short,' and you cannot put it into the stringing machine. There are then alternatives, but it is quite tricky for something that could have been way simpler: stringing vertically, as I said, without skipping any hole for going into it after. This way, you can always put your flying clamp between two close strings.

    What do you think about this?
     
  4. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    39,269
    Likes Received:
    535
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    while not the prettiest, it can be done with flying clamp. take a look at the following video at around 4:30+

    [video=youtube;Nt1IEXUuoGk]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nt1IEXUuoGk&list=UUIxpSHXfLQijePzgOM03YkQ& index=23[/video]
     
  5. merciadriluca

    merciadriluca Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2012
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Univ. Eng. Student
    Location:
    Liège
    Effectively, but you can clearly see the problems you then encounter.

    Either you string that hard one (B12-A11) or you don't. Considering double flying clamps:

    If you string it, you need to attach a string that is way too far as compared to habitually. It necessarily puts extra stress on the frame, or, in the best case, it forces you to put a wrong tension on the next string (B10-A10) as you cannot properly pull the string (e.g. it needs to be ON the flying clamp, as in the video, and that clearly modifies the tension). Well, if you're really good, you can manage to pull the string without making it involved with the flying clamp, but that's extra work.

    If you don't string it, you might be too short on the total string length on that side (for B10-A10), as stringing B12-A11 would have clearly given you more length for stringing.

    Considering this, I don't really think following the Yonex stringing pattern is that important. But that's only a point of view.
     
  6. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    39,269
    Likes Received:
    535
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    it is not perfect. but if one wants to following Yonex pattern. it is better than double pulling (topic of your other thread).
     
  7. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    39,269
    Likes Received:
    535
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    the length difference is like an centimeter or two? i can hardly believe that to be of any significance. if it is, then you need to cut the string length properly.
     
  8. merciadriluca

    merciadriluca Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2012
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Univ. Eng. Student
    Location:
    Liège
    My question is then: is there a real interest in following Yonex pattern (i.e. does it worth it in this case, considering the `extra work' for that row)? (Considering you make simple pulling.)
     
  9. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    39,269
    Likes Received:
    535
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    the biggest advantage is what has been pointed out, and that's a shorter string segment going from the "last" string to the knot. which results in less tension loss.

    as for real advantage when it comes to the feel of the stringjob? i would be very surprised if the side string segment has anything to do with it. they are way away from the sweetspot.

    in fact, many manufacturers don't even have this "trick" in their standard stringing pattern.

    so my answer to your question would be: no.
     
  10. Mark A

    Mark A Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2005
    Messages:
    6,166
    Likes Received:
    112
    Occupation:
    Warehouse dogsbody, Stringer, Panda reseller,
    Location:
    St Helens, UK
    With the 9-12-10-8 path, the long 9-12 loop is under active (machine) tension and the 10-8 loop to the knot is short; with the 9-10-12 path, the 12-8 loop is under passive (knot) tension only.

    No brainer for me - the second way will have a lot more tension loss than the first.
     
  11. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    39,269
    Likes Received:
    535
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    not disagreeing, but for the purpose of understanding and discussion..

    does it matter?

    maybe a few pounds of tension loss at the side of the racket which will have very little influence on the sweetspot strings. aside from us being anal retentive engineers, will it make any significant playability differences?

    or alternatively, maybe we can just call it a natural proportional tensioning?
     
  12. Mark A

    Mark A Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2005
    Messages:
    6,166
    Likes Received:
    112
    Occupation:
    Warehouse dogsbody, Stringer, Panda reseller,
    Location:
    St Helens, UK
    The tension loss will crawl into the middle of the bed eventually, but as there are 11 mains on each side, even a 25% loss on the outer main will "normalize" to a 2% loss over the entire bed...

    Probably doesn't make a difference to playability, if I'm honest:).
     
  13. kingzzz

    kingzzz Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 12, 2010
    Messages:
    291
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    NZ
    Yonex pattern on a yonex racket will at least improve your chances of a warranty should anything happen
     
  14. kwun

    kwun Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2002
    Messages:
    39,269
    Likes Received:
    535
    Occupation:
    BC Janitor
    Location:
    Santa Clara, CA, USA
    if the creep can pass through the friction of all the grommets that is. and we know that tension loss is in the region of pounds. so i believe a 25% creep will not even register.
     
  15. Mark A

    Mark A Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 2, 2005
    Messages:
    6,166
    Likes Received:
    112
    Occupation:
    Warehouse dogsbody, Stringer, Panda reseller,
    Location:
    St Helens, UK
    Indeed. And it has to overcome the friction from the crosses as well...

    Have any Yonex warranty claims been bounced because of this? I wouldn't put it past them:).
     
  16. _Rav_

    _Rav_ Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2010
    Messages:
    183
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Gofer
    Location:
    UK
    Or if you're a nutter like me you can buy two extra flying clamps and bolt them together...

    c1.jpg

    c2.jpg

    c3.jpg
     
  17. merciadriluca

    merciadriluca Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2012
    Messages:
    24
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Univ. Eng. Student
    Location:
    Liège

Share This Page