tensioning the crosses

[DinkAlot]

Man, Sir DinkALot, you must be really good at art of Iron Sand Palm.

No sir, but I'm pretty good at the "wrap the string around your hands twice and pull hard" technique.

[CoolDoo6]

No sir, but I'm pretty good at the "wrap the string around your hands twice and pull hard" technique.

Your hard smashing probably gave you a very tough hand. If I were to do what you suggest, my hand would be severed in half. I think this thread should be rated 18 to protect the minors.

[Matt]

Jerby:

I happen ask my stringer about tentioning every other string since you brought it up. He said the stringer should string evey string. This is because if it's done every two, there will be friction loss. The other reason is in reality, the tention of the racket will not be accurate because it will be off(lower tention).

People have claimed that constant tention pull would able to get around it, but the issue would be the enlongation since it will be on every two instead of every one.

[LazyBuddy]

Jerby:

I happen ask my stringer about tentioning every other string since you brought it up. He said the stringer should string evey string. This is because if it's done every two, there will be friction loss. The other reason is in reality, the tention of the racket will not be accurate because it will be off(lower tention).

People have claimed that constant tention pull would able to get around it, but the issue would be the enlongation since it will be on every two instead of every one.

Consistant pulling machine works well on main if you have to tension 2 piece at a time. However, with the friction, it will take much longer settle time, and lose much more tension, once it comes to cross.

[taneepak]

Consistant pulling machine works well on main if you have to tension 2 piece at a time. However, with the friction, it will take much longer settle time, and lose much more tension, once it comes to cross.

If what you say is true, then why not try to tension 3 or 4 pieces of the mains in one pull? It will save a lot of pulling.

[silentheart]

If what you say is true, then why not try to tension 3 or 4 pieces of the mains in one pull? It will save a lot of pulling.

There is a balance between the time saved for less pull vs time wait for less pull. The time to wait for a 3 or more strings to settle is much much longer then tensioning 1 at a time when a drop weight machine is used. If I use a electric constant pull machine, it takes 1 pull to get the same tension on both strings. How do I know this? I pluck both strings and they gives me the same tone. I never tried 3 strings so I do not know if 3 or more strings will have same effect.

[CoolDoo6]

If what you say is true, then why not try to tension 3 or 4 pieces of the mains in one pull? It will save a lot of pulling.

Might as well go the whole hog and just tension the final 2 pieces on either side. That will save even more time. The correct tension to apply in this scenario would be:

desired string tension + X

where X is the additional tension required so that when the tension of the final 2 pieces are propagated to the other pieces, the string bed would attain the desired string tension as a whole. I have no idea what X should be. Perhaps those interested in saving time would like to experiment and find out what X is. There is gold in them X's.

[Neil Nicholls]

The time to wait for a 3 or more strings to settle is much much longer then tensioning 1 at a time when a drop weight machine is used.

What is your reasoning behind this?
Why isn't the time to settle proportional to the number of strings?
i.e. 1 string => time=x
2 string => time=2x
3 string => time=3x
If you pre-stretch how does it affect this time?

[taneepak]

I think pulling two or more strings, whether on the mains or crosses, with one pull is utter nonsense. It can never come close to pulling each individual string.
If you are a perfectionist, you might want to increase tension slightly on the longer strings vis-a-vis the shorter strings. This applies equally if you use more tension on an iso racquet vs an oval racquet, because at the same tensions an oval racquet will feel tighter than an iso racquet due to its shorter strings.
Now pulling two strings in one pull is something of a joke, no?

[silentheart]

What is your reasoning behind this?
Why isn't the time to settle proportional to the number of strings?
i.e. 1 string => time=x
2 string => time=2x
3 string => time=3x
If you pre-stretch how does it affect this time?

My experiments shows for drop weight machine is more like
1 string = 15~20 sec
2 strings = 25~35 sec ( I tension for 10 sec, clamp, then tension again)
3 strings > 1 min (I tension 3 times)

These are just my observations from my experiment. There is no scientific reason behind it.

[LazyBuddy]

I think pulling two or more strings, whether on the mains or crosses, with one pull is utter nonsense. It can never come close to pulling each individual string.

I am not trying to promote pulling 2 or more strings in 1 shot. However, I do believe it will work better for main than crosses, due to less friction (between string vs. string, string vs. gromments).

[silentheart]

I am not trying to promote pulling 2 or more strings in 1 shot. However, I do believe it will work better for main than crosses, due to less friction (between string vs. string, string vs. gromments).

I tension my racquet every string, main or cross for more advanced player. I only tension (16~18lb) every other main on Jr. racquets for the very young kids. And yes, their strings does break after long time abuse too. Like LB, I do not advacate pulling 2 mains at one time for most of the raquets.