Funky String Pattern I got my NS 7700 strung at Yo's and i noticed it was different from the standard 4 knot stringing. In fact, it was like I've never seen before... I know he didn't pull this out of his ass since he's a very reputable stringer and he did the same thing to my friend's racket. Anyone know of this? The gap at the bottom kind of looks weird but...
http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12870&highlight=pattern please write your review of the ns7700 over here http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?p=516908#post516908
very interesting... he didn't do that to my MP 66... he actually did all the crosses without skipping them. only thing i don't like about him is that he did 1 piece stringing on mine.
weird string pattern on yonex AT900P anyone know what is the purpose for such stringing pattern? is it the frame has problem?
Less string usage. My previous stringer also does the same thing as well. It feels the same as usual.
My stringer did that as well. Not sure about the reason. Unfortunately, missing grommets caused the string to break within 5 hours of play
less string usage? that means the string's length is different with others ? i think the string is long enough...why dont just optimize usage of the string?
One main reason is, if your stringer is using string from a reel (100m for 10 racquets or 200m for 20), he can easily squeeze out stringing on an extra racquet with this stringing pattern. Overall it will save him time and money which is what some stringers I have personally experienced in South East Asian countries are habitually aiming for. Otherwise if he's just using those individual pack strings then this habit will still save him time by not doing that cross. Most people don't ever hit the shuttle that low on the string bed anyway so there's no true problem with playability.
Over a decade back, one of the stringers told me that Rashid Sidek prefers this pattern. In fact, he showed me a photo that Rashid skipped the 2nd and 4th strings from the bottom saying that the shuttle never touches this part of the racket anyway and it reduces air resistance. I tried it and did not feel any difference so I guess I am okay either way. I don't know about the saving time/money part since it's only 1 or 2 strings out of 22 crosses and most stringers in Singapore and Malaysia (only places I've strung in SEA) uses single string packs.
If I remember correctly even Peter Gade's Slim 10 was also strung with this bottom cross skipped/omitted back in 2001, and if you Google for his photos, one of the first links show him using an AT700 with the string pattern in question. Overall the main thing about this pattern is more to do with the aesthetic appeal (some just don't like the look of one missing cross) rather than playability. The topic of air resistance reduction has already been proven to be nonsense since badminton strings are too thin to actually affect the air flow unless at extreme speeds only achievable by machines
With regard to the air resistance nonsense, #121 and #129 simply have the bottom cross moved down one grommet, so the stringbed area is still the same! I can envisage the birth of this quirk quite easily *man is stringing racket. Ties off. Notices bottom cross is through T8 instead of T9. "Sh*t! Customer is coming in two mins and I have no time to redo the racket!" *customer walks in "Woah - what's happened here!? Why is the bottom cross so low?" *stringer throws a Hail Mary "Oh, it... er... plays better." (barely managing to keep the question mark off the end) *customer plays with racket and decides it DID play better *customer's fellow club members all demand the new pattern from the stringer
sounds like a perfect case to do a A/B comparison. we need a volunteer with 2 identical rackets, string them fresh using each pattern, using the same string and tension, and have people compare them. anyone?
