Im not too sure your last few statements can really be justified. There arent really many issues with preweaving it simply separates the process of weaving and tensioning into two different acts. Im wondering if a stringer doesnt preweave what are they supposed to use the string mover for? Prevent notching? This isnt an issue with badminton strings vs tennis strings. And although I personally dont use an awl myself, I dont see anything wrong with it, if a stringer is experienced with it. True it posses more of a risk to damaging the string, but just like a good machine, its not just the tools, but rather the stringer that provides the quality string job. My opinion is that stringers, especially those new to stringing, should simply use the floss technique because its easier, and less potential damage.
Of course you can preweave the string to save the trouble of having to fight through those tricky shared grommets. But preweaving somewhat restricts the free movement of the crosses. Without preweaving, you have the advantage of a very long "free end" of the cross string which ensures you have a laser-like alignment of the crosses without the slightest twisting or kinking of the cross string from beginning to end. This will result in more uniform flex of the crosses because at every intersection of a shared grommet, the crosses are in one alignment. With preweaving, it is unlikely you can have such "straight as an arrow" path of the crosses.
What a tool was originally invented for, has nothing to do whether you can effectly use it for 2nd kind of usage. There are noodle makers using 2 thin blades chopping noodles from their head, and they did not bleed to death, but effectively increased their speed and noodle's quality. Of course, such attempt is not meant for general joe doe, who has no experience or training. But you can not use "traditional" to conclude whether something is "do able" for others, by your own theory and standard. Personally, I've strung over 500 rackets, and none of the rackets die on the spot and over 99.999% of the string breakage (after reasonal time of usage) breaks in a reasonable spot, or due to other reasons. Very seldom, a custom brings back a racket with string broken around shared gromments. Even so, they usually admit they tend to use the racket to scoop up shuttles from hardwood type of floors. Therefore, this is a good proof of my careful usage of awl contribute almost none damage to the string, when you compare to normal usage (thunderous smashes by players, etc ). The string will 99.9% break normally, way before any "shared string" effect even kicking in place. There's no point to continue this argument. If you believe anything "in theory" can do such and such damage, you should never even string a racket to begin with. Even a perfect string job will add "potential" damage and wear & tear to your racket frame, as well as string or gromment itself.
Do you even understand what my method is? Did I ever say use an awl to poke the string through? My method is to use a non-sharp awl (good luck if you can use this kind to dig a hole in a leather, if you want to try ), gentle insert and exit of the shared gromments in a gentle movement. No shake or bending when the tip is inside the gromment. Then, use a nail cutter, to cut the cross string tip to be sharp (very small angle preferred), and use this piece to go through the shared gromment. There's never a moment of 2 pieces string and awl tip all inside gromment to begin with.
its one, but Taneepak address his reason this is unsuitable is because of torsional twisting of the string after pulling it through numerous grommets and weaves. Its true, however minimal. I think LB hit the nail on the head. I mean think of baking soda, and its numerous uses. Now think of its original use, which was baking. You cant say a specific item or tool will always result in xyz results. As LB has proven, there is more than one way to 'sheer a sheep.'
You are good! So, there is more than one way to insert the sharp-tip string then. It's all about finding a method that you are most comfy with and use it on a consistent basis.
No matter how careful and gentle you are in using the awl, you are still inserting it into the grommet. An awl has a sharp point; a non-sharp awl will have to be sanded down to blunt the point which will then become too thick. Conceptually, shared grommets are a conceptual weakness of a racquet frame-the larger the grommets the weaker the frame. If you can insert an awl into a grommet that has an existing main string to make space for a diagonally cut string leader, then the grommet is just too large-a badly designed grommet. The best shared grommets must be tight and not be overly large.
By the number of responses, the majority of stringers have no problem with using their chosen methods to get the cross string through the shared grommets.
In theory, that's correct. However, if everything goes with theory, then any current string machine in the market is very bad for the string job, as we can only tension 1 piece at a time, therefore, create un-even force during the process. The "best machine" in theory, should have 44 (assume 22 main, 22 cross) tension head, and pull every single piece all together. Oh, well, then you can argue about the knots... My conclusion is, in theory, there's always trade offs. You gain some, you lose some. The acceptable method is the ones give you more gains, and omit the losses. There's no perfect solution. Including your string mover method. By using string mover, I can argue you pull the existing string which cause un-even force, and additional fricition, which also generates heat, as well as enlarge the gromments at the same time. Just the same argument as you are against other method.
In addition to LB's point, there will be extra stress on the frame where you use the string mover to move string up or down to insert the shared string.
Yeah, I agree that when the awl is improperly used ie. people just jam it in, it not only damages the other shared string by mechanical pressure, it can also damage the frame if the graphite is pushed outwards if excessive force is used. That said, gentle use of the awl can't be that bad, and if it works, go for it. As for the string mover, it's quite useless @ 33+ lbs and it might even add more stress and damage to both string and frame if used! My string mover and awl both collect dust as I'm sticking to the good old fashioned slow method of making a pointed tip to pass through a shared grommet and it has never failed on my yet! Just go with a method that can do some quality jobs and stick to it. As long as you're not TURBO ripping strings through the mains and crosses, you should be OK. After stringing for awhile + watching and learning from others, I'm pretty scared of people who can string in 30 minutes or less.
In reality, one who can clear 6' over the backline with a 5U racquet has a much faster handspeed than another who can clear the same distance but only with a 2U racquet.
in theory, this thread should be about how someone's strings keep snapping whenever they string rackets. maybe we should stick to that.... or not. Also in theory, someone would have understood the joke and continued it, but, reality always prevails.....
