User Tag List

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 18 to 34 of 74
  1. #18
    Regular Member DinkAlot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    dcbadminton.net
    Posts
    12,212
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    One piece, 2-knot stringing has some merits, one of which is that saves the stringer some money if he uses bulk string reels. However, 0ne-pc 2-knot stringing is not good in preventing or minimizing frame distortion, irrespective of whether you start the mains from the middle, alternating or otherwise, or from one side. I have covered this one-piece stringing weakness in another thread.
    What about my 1-piece method, 25 mains, cross 27.5. The first two bottom cross I stay 25lbs., on the third cross I switch over to 27.5lbs. and there on.?

  2. #19
    Regular Member DinkAlot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    dcbadminton.net
    Posts
    12,212
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by F-Man
    So could one of you experts i.e. Sir DinkAlot or Taneepak offer detailed instructions regarding the 4 knot method? Although I did not enrol into any kind of a professional course to learn how to string a rackets, I would like to think that I am at least competent at it compared to some of the master experienced stringers who visit this forum.
    I'm no expert like PeteLSD, Eepak, LazyBuddy or Cooler when it comes to stringing but I've conversed with a few experts including 2 or 3 Yonex Certified stringers so I know I'm at least adequate, won't give wrong/bad advice.

    I can do a few 4-knot methods. The easiest/best way for me is:

    1) Same as my 2-knot method (pre-string then pull) up to the point where I do the right tie-off.

    2) Instead of transitioning over to the mains from the left side bottom, I pull the last left main (add 3-5lbs.), clamp, cut and tie-off.

    3) Now I go to the top and tie-off at A5.

    4) I add 10% of the main string tension for the cross (if main 25, then cross 27.5) and pull from the second top cross to minimize stress on the tie-off. You can pull the first cross but I like ot minimize stress at the top.

    5) Continue to pull to the last string on the bottom, add 3-4lbs. Tie-off at B6 or B8 (depending how you did the main tie-off).

  3. #20
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    In France, at East.
    Posts
    111
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    DinkAlot : I would imagine some use this method. I do not. I try to balance and spread the tension evenly as possible (within reason).

    In a perfect world, you would alternate every string from the center out. However, I find this unnecessary and time consuming. I do something like this (all tensioning going from the center out, total 22 strings, 11 left, 11 right, I have the bottom tie-off on the right side):

    Assuming 25/27.5lbs.

    1) Tension the 3 center strings on left side (8 strings left on left side)

    2) Then alternate to the right side and tension the 6 center strings (5 strings left on right side)

    3) Back to the left side 4 strings (4 strings left on left)

    4) Then right side tension 4 strings (1 string left on right for tie-off)

    5) Then tension last 4 string on left (0 strings left)

    6) Now tension the first two bottom cross strings at the same tension as the mains (25lbs.)

    7) Go to 29-30lbs. and tension the last string on the right (tie-off)

    8) Adjust back to 27.5lbs. and tension the third cross string from the bottom

    9) Keep going until you finish.

    Chilefeu : Dinkalot, do you still break 7 racquets in 2 months ???

    I suggest you trying my method at least once. I'll try yours too . I guess my english is quite well and therefore, there is no misunderstanding in your explanations

    -Tension : your tension, 25 X 27,5 for instance. (ISO racquet)
    -Racquet : 22 mains, 23 crosses.
    (you can use this method on a 20 mains/22 crosses racquet as well, just need to change tension on 1 or 2 string.)

    1) Start on the main, tension 5 strings on left side at 25 lbs.

    2) Go on the right side, tension 5 strings at 25 lbs.

    3) back on the left side. Tension 3 strings at 23 lbs.

    4) back on the right side. Tension 3 strings at 23 lbs.

    5) then, go on the left side again, finish the 3 remaining strings at 21 lbs, without adding tension on the last string !!!

    6) In a second time, start crosses from the middle is my preference. You can start from the botton too, I think It's less dangerous than starting from the top .
    So, from the middle to the top, Tension 5 strings at 27.5.

    7) From the middle to the bottom, Tension 5 strings at 27.5.

    8) Next, back on top, Tension 3 strings at 25 or 25.5 (according to your preference)

    9) Again, back on bottom, Tension 3 strings at 25 or 25.5.

    10) To finish with stringing, Tension the 3 remainings strings at the top at 23 or 23.5, and Tension the 4 remainings strings at 23 or 23.5.
    Don't add tension on the last top and bottom strings.

    This method is recommended by many stringers in France. According to them It's safest ever, and it enables the sweetspot to be more efficient and playable for a longer time.

    You'll tell me how it performs ...

  4. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DinkAlot
    What about my 1-piece method, 25 mains, cross 27.5. The first two bottom cross I stay 25lbs., on the third cross I switch over to 27.5lbs. and there on.?
    You have a hotchpot of patterns and tensions, that when mixed together, will hopefully take care of the troublesome first tie-off and at the same time give you a frame with minimal distortion. It is too complicated for me to work it all out if it works. But if it plays, heck why not? But your one pc 2-knot stringing pattern at least tries to redress some of the inherent weakness of one-pc stringing. Personally I would not string one-pc, 2-knots.

  5. #22
    Regular Member DinkAlot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    dcbadminton.net
    Posts
    12,212
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chilefeu
    Dinkalot, do you still break 7 racquets in 2 months ???

    I suggest you trying my method at least once. I'll try yours too . I guess my english is quite well and therefore, there is no misunderstanding in your explanations
    Thanks for the advice Chilefeu. Does your method still retain the original shape of the racket? I'd like to see what Eepak and Pete think about this method.

    No, that 6-7 rackets in 2 months was a record for me.

    For the record, I have strung for quite a few players and none of their rackets have broken due to my stringing; and many of these rackets are strung at 27/30lbs. to 30/33lbs. Also, as I've said before, I've mingled with a few pros and they all say my stringing is sound so I'm very confident broken rackets is not due to my own stringing.

  6. #23
    Regular Member DinkAlot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    dcbadminton.net
    Posts
    12,212
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    You have a hotchpot of patterns and tensions, that when mixed together, will hopefully take care of the troublesome first tie-off and at the same time give you a frame with minimal distortion. It is too complicated for me to work it all out if it works. But if it plays, heck why not? But your one pc 2-knot stringing pattern at least tries to redress some of the inherent weakness of one-pc stringing. Personally I would not string one-pc, 2-knots.
    Thanks for the reply. Yes, it plays, and very well in IMHO and a few others.

    I did a test and won't know for about another 2-4 weeks; strung 4 rackets for a Pro. 2 NS9000-X and 2 NS900-S. All at 28/31lbs. One of each X and S with a 2-knot (my way), and one of each with the current Yonex 4-knot. I marked each racket and asked the Pro to give me feedback, which one(s) play better and why.

    Prior, I strung this Pro's rackets with my 2-knot method and she was very happy with the string job.

  7. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    In France, at East.
    Posts
    111
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Arrow

    Quote Originally Posted by DinkAlot
    Thanks for the advice Chilefeu. Does your method still retain the original shape of the racket? I'd like to see what Eepak and Pete think about this method.

    No, that 6-7 rackets in 2 months was a record for me.

    For the record, I have strung for quite a few players and none of their rackets have broken due to my stringing; and many of these rackets are strung at 27/30lbs. to 30/33lbs. Also, as I've said before, I've mingled with a few pros and they all say my stringing is sound so I'm very confident broken rackets is not due to my own stringing.
    Hi Dinkalot. I apologize, I hope I didn't annoy you. And I didn't know None of your raquet's friends broke.
    Well It seems to depend on your own way of playing ... I gave my best advices about stringing Dan, but I cannot coach (I'm joking of course I'm sure your level is 3 times better than mine ...)

    As for Eepak and Pete, I'm looking forward to hear them. But Once again, An experienced coach gave me this technic and told me it was the best one. It must be relative then

    I'm gonna try, not later than tomorrow night, tensionning my MP-99 at 34 Lbs. I've already made this test but It seems to be inconsistent since I didn't use enough clamps. I neither break my racquet, nor the string. (I just restrung because 24 Lbs is fine for me - going higher is too painful for my shoulders)
    I'll let you know the results ...

    P.S. : I had time to modify my order. I ordered 4 Sets MP Orange instead of white as you adviced me. Hope it will perform well.
    Thank you for your help

  8. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    In France, at East.
    Posts
    111
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Lightbulb

    Ah, just forgot to mention that there is no racquet distortion when adding 2 Lbs on the crosses with my technic, whatever the string machine is.

    I strung on another machine that was not mine, It was only a 4 support-one, and I had distortion since I didn't add these 2 Lbs ...

    I'm now waiting for your replies, what do you think about this stringing technic ???

    Thanks

  9. #26
    Regular Member DinkAlot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    dcbadminton.net
    Posts
    12,212
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Chilefeu
    I'm now waiting for your replies, what do you think about this stringing technic ???

    Thanks
    After thinking it through, your method makes perfect sense to me and is ideal! It will also minimize tension loss as well as enlarge the sweetspot based on my estimation.

    Why? The key to stringing is balancing the tension throughout the frame. The middle main to the edge have significant differences in string length. Pulling them at the same constant tension will yield different stress patterns. Your method minimizes this.

    I'm going to string a racket with your method right now.

    Be back in about 15 minutes...

  10. #27
    Regular Member DinkAlot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    dcbadminton.net
    Posts
    12,212
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Chilefu: also, I was trying to come up with some kind of method similar to this...when I had more time to talk to a few physics experts but I think you just solved my problem. Thanks!

  11. #28
    Regular Member DinkAlot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    dcbadminton.net
    Posts
    12,212
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Chilefu: strung my original Cab 20 Tour SP with your method and here are my observations:

    +It was easy to do. No problems at all.

    +The original shape of the racket is retained

    +Sweet spot appear greatly increased after some informal hitting

    +Significantly less stress and the corners.

    I'll play with it tonight and tell you how it goes, thanks!

  12. #29
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,302
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hi Chilefeu,

    Your method seems to be a variation of the proportional stringing method discussed way back . . . when

    Oh, here it is: http://www.badmintoncentral.com/foru...ead.php?t=8079

  13. #30
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    176
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Chilefeu and DinkAlot:

    What you guys have shared with the rest of us on this forum is very interesting and useful. Thank you very much. There is however, another question that I would like to ask.

    If you guys have strung any of the Yonex Nanospeed series rackets before, you'll know that towards the end at either sides of the mains, the string loops back in a different way than the standard traditional way. Unfortunately I am not sure how to explain with letters and numbers.

    Point is, what are the benefits of doing this? Relevance and implications? I have noticed a number of stringers using this pattern for ALL rackets not just that of the Nanospeed series. Does anyone know?

  14. #31
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,302
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Ahhhh, this was discussed way back also. Taneepak is the best person to explain the Yonex stringing method.

    Quote Originally Posted by F-Man
    Chilefeu and DinkAlot:

    What you guys have shared with the rest of us on this forum is very interesting and useful. Thank you very much. There is however, another question that I would like to ask.

    If you guys have strung any of the Yonex Nanospeed series rackets before, you'll know that towards the end at either sides of the mains, the string loops back in a different way than the standard traditional way. Unfortunately I am not sure how to explain with letters and numbers.

    Point is, what are the benefits of doing this? Relevance and implications? I have noticed a number of stringers using this pattern for ALL rackets not just that of the Nanospeed series. Does anyone know?

  15. #32
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    New York, US
    Posts
    10,283
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by F-Man
    Do anyone work from centre to out, complete the knot side without alternating, and the carry on as normal with the standard two know method stringing?
    I am sure there are stringers who prefer quatity (e.g. speed) than quality. This method does save a bit time in the progress, but the quality of work usually take a beat up. It's easier to result into un-even balance and especially dangerous when working on high tension.

  16. #33
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    176
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete LSD
    Hi Chilefeu,

    Your method seems to be a variation of the proportional stringing method discussed way back . . . when

    Oh, here it is: http://www.badmintoncentral.com/foru...ead.php?t=8079
    Hi Pete LSD:

    I started reading that thread on many occasions but never got the chance to finish it. As I am not completely familiar with the proportional stringing method, would you be so kind as to tell me how the method described by Chilefeu is a variation?

  17. #34
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Scotland
    Posts
    176
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LazyBuddy
    I am sure there are stringers who prefer quatity (e.g. speed) than quality. This method does save a bit time in the progress, but the quality of work usually take a beat up. It's easier to result into un-even balance and especially dangerous when working on high tension.
    Good point. The main reason that I started to string rackets myself was because of many bad experiences due to poor string jobs.

Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Variations for Different Levels Playing Together
    By Kevin402can in forum Techniques / Training
    Replies: 6
    : 05-20-2010, 11:17 AM
  2. Replies: 4
    : 08-14-2008, 04:35 PM
  3. how to start tensioning when you prestring and only have flying clamps?
    By miketlo in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & Tools
    Replies: 1
    : 09-05-2007, 07:20 AM
  4. Replies: 15
    : 04-23-2004, 01:24 PM
  5. the different variations for Swing Powers
    By zero in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 8
    : 08-24-2001, 07:56 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •