I don't understand what you are trying to say. Are you saying ".....all the racquet you use are illegal because every racquet center area is denser than the throat area and they are also less denser than the 12, 3, and 9 o'clock.."? I think you are mixed up in between dense and less dense. BTW, of course the center of the stringed area must be denser than other parts. This is the same as the center area must not be less dense than other parts. Pls refer to law 4.2 and 4.2.1 which says "The stringed area shall be flat and consist of a pattern of crossed strings either alternately interlaced or bonded where they cross. The stringing pattern shall be generally uniform and, in particular, not less dense in the center than in any other area.
Please read it correctly. The center can not be less dense than any other area. ie. The other edges can be less dense than the center. That is the all in all the racquet design. Just to prove you are wrong. Look at any racquet on standard pattern. The string density near the 5 o'clock area is less than the string near the 2 o'clock area. Also, even string with 23 cross on standard pattern, the string density is still less than the center. So, if you think the string density should be same over the entire string bed, the racquet you designed is illegal. And, you still have not respond to my other questions.
Of course it is possible to string a racquet with a less dense center area, simply by omitting a few cross strings in the middle. My earlier suggestion of A/B testing of a racquet with one missing cross at the top grommets #8 against a racquet with one missing cross at the bottome grommets #10 is to find out which has better playability. I thought it might be, not will be, considered illegal but that is not the main point. The main point is which racquet plays better. It will be interesting to find out.
Dear Taneepak, It is illegal to have less dense center area, that is what the law says. Please read, If you do not know how to read, please ask some one to translate for you. What I am triying to explain to you is your statement is wrong. "However, this racquet D might be considered illegal as it makes the stringbed center area less dense than the other parts." Also, if you compare the standard pattern racquet, the 2 o'clock area of the racquet has higher string density than center, that is just the geometry goes. So all the racquet you are using with standard pattern is illegal? I ask you "DEFINE THE TERM BETTER", and you just skip over that question? You also fail to reply a simple question that all the racquet used in this comparison are same make and model. I just can not have a logical discussion with a person like you because you either omit question or just answer with some facts you made up. Sorry, I am not going to participate with this conversation any more.
Gentlemen please, I'm enjoying reading both your posts. It's clear to me that you are two people from very different cultures with very different references, expressing fairly complex ideas and having some difficulty understanding each other. Let's all calm down, re read the others posts, and stop trying to make points of each other. Bear in mind the idea that this isn't an argument, it's a discussion. Please.
That is right, let us keep our cool and just discuss rationally without risking getting a heart attack. Of course I don't expect everyone to agree on the merits of my own preferred stringing practices, which I like to reiterate again: 1. One missing cross string at the bottom grommets #10. 2. Always use a 4 to 6 loop starting knot stringing the crosses top down. Using 4 to 6 loop starting knots require lots of practice. With thin strings like ZM62 it requires even greater patience. You cannot use a 2-loop starting knot. It just doesn't work well except for tennis. 3. No string pre-stretching and no load spreader. 4. Thinner strings or smaller frame racquets like ovals will require some decrease in tension vs thicker strings or iso frames. 5. Get rid of any U-shaped grommets at the throat area and replace them with small single ones. Take a look at Li Ning's N series on how grommets at this T-joint area should be like. You can of course disagree with the above, but why not give it a go. Maybe Silentheart should at least experiment with it.
off topic-it's a long history (just a tip for you).. ..i know you're quite new in BC & probably don't know much of the personalities here, and i don't want to put anyone on the spot, but if you've read Mr. T's (that's short for taneepak), other posts you'll find out he's gotten into disagreements, arguments before with other BCers. I'm sure you won't be surprised after reading them. Of course, there could be more BCers involved, but i don't think they're as bold as the ones who've gotten down with Mr. T....Hopefully you won't get yourself into one..
Well, this is an unusual input and has nothing to do with the thread. I have a funny feeling ctjcad is calling this payback time after I sent him a strong rebuke a few months back in response to his unsolicited pm to me trying to convince me how bad Jewish people were. This is about putting things a little in perspective.
^^off topic-tis the reason why..^^ - Mr. T, keep it up. All i did in that post, above, is to give Grotius (and maybe other newbies who don't know) a hint on the history pertaining to you in BC. Yes, a history filled with long and i would say useless debates (with countless members) that once in a while end up with the threads being locked or the mods giving a warning or two. Yes, a lot of us have seen them & please don't try to ignore that fact. And no, this is not the first or second time you got it on with silentheart. I'm sure many here would testify and agree with my claim. Pardon me if my posts seem to put you on a spot (which i think it has since you replied to it w/some uneasiness) but I hope and pray, for the sake of civility, that this will be the last major debate between you and silentheart and others. - Your funny feeling assumption of the reason why i made the above post is maybe funny, because of "payback time", but is totally wrong! Please check your PM box. - Sorry again, all, for this off topic post. This'll be my last one in this thread.
Taneepak, you say; 5. Get rid of any U-shaped grommets at the throat area and replace them with small single ones. Take a look at Li Ning's N series on how grommets at this T-joint area should be like. Why is this? What advantage is there in replacing them with single grommets?
where is the proof agreed. i was going to say more, but this is a pretty good summary. Taneepak, do you also trim your grommits on the inside? Would taping the rim of your frame to cover the grommits provide even better aerodynamics? What about the polished finish versus the matte finish, which is better? Within these parameters we are discussing, you have provided and will not be able to scientifically prove that one more string provides, significantly less drag, nor adding one more string add's significant mass to affect the shuttle.
If the grommets are long on the inside of the frame, I use a sharp diagonal cutter to shorten them. Have a look at the Li Ning N series frames. They have tight, small, and short grommets but not as short as mine especially around the waist area.
this is very interesting thread but still can't keep up reading..with the number of posts coming... taneepak, silenheart what kind of stringing machine are you all using? hope you all don't mind me asking as only if i can't catch up with all the theories, arguments, discussions, i might join in..
yes i admit that, can't even finish yours, silentheart and taneepak what more to say so many.. but to summarize them - some info, findings are very knowledgeable and interesting especially on the different between swingweight and drag force effects. some are purely gimmicks suitable only for customers/players not for debating, that's why its so long..
Hi all, Next week-end I'm gonna try removing 1 cross string at the bottom. If my memory serves me well, I've already tried that. I didn't feel any differences in spite of the fact I was much younger at this time ... So I think this method worth retrying again. I'll let you know the result As for the debate top down vs. down top ... I prefer Top-Down, even at very high tension. Why ? - Because It protects the main strings from a mishit. If crosses are more tensionned, the risk is shared between the mains and crosses together. It doesn't help much if the player is bad, but it delays the breakage anyway - Because on my machine it is easier to string this way. I have more space to work. - Because It seems I get a more precise and crisp sweetspot, whatever I add or not tension to the tie-off & starting knot. - Because I've already strung 600 racquets so far and yet I haven't experienced any breakages using this technic. (I've strung up to 36 lbs with Zymax 0.70) Of course I do not say that Taneepak is right on all aspects. I do not take his defense. This is just the result of my experiences and what I can tell you. Hope we will still learn and share more about stringing as the discussion is going ... Cheers
absolutely correct we are here to share, discuss, pick up new ideas but skip your doubts.. based on your above post i can tell you are using a mechanical machine and probably stringing for a couple of years, say 3-4 years? whether its top down, bottom ups or even center up & down is not so important here. its the finished job.... customers happy $€ paid and they come back with their friends is a sign of your stringing success....good luck!
Heres my 2 cents on this topic The extra cross string on top is more for string breakage. If u do a miss hit, most of the time its the mains and its at the top that it breaks and that area has a higher likely hood of only two strings hitting the bird. But if you have one more cross than your more safe. This really helps those who string at much higher tensions. If your machine won' t give you room to add that extra string than I recommend just weave a piece by hand. Doesn' t need much tension. Its just a safty valve for hits in that area. I know some stringers will flame me for telling this secret because they want your string to break more. Not good for business. With the extra cross at the top I rarely break a string now except due to wear and tear or notching. Before doing this my Bg 80 was breaking so fast and was still brand new. Some of my friends who let the shops do it was wondering why they break so fast. I explained it but they look at me like I am a noob. This pro shop that everyone uses strings it with 22 crosses how can they be wrong. Because I don' t string for a living I can tell them the truth. But the pro shop will say that it breaks because you are very powerful and have powerful swing so you should string it very tight. Of coarse you will have evan more string breakage now. My friends break strings so fast its not evan funny. We are only recreational players and yet we break them like the pros. My friends don' t swing that fast or have that kind of power to break it that fast. The shops will always say that they are very powerful to make them feel good and come back to buy lots of expensive Yonex stuff and string jobs. I try to sell them cheap but high quality stuff but they say its fake or my advice is not welcomed. I think its because they spend so much money that they feel that the shop must be right. Because my advice is free it is taken for granted :crying::crying::crying:. Maybe I should start charging than people will listen.
yes extra string on top helps string breakages in that area. next time show them your racket maybe they believe, if they still don't let them continue paying more!