PaitonSport
Regular Member
Victor stringing pattern to me is the best so far. By a little configuration with 25,5 Main - 28 Cross (for 27 lbs) to me will result crispy sound and of course give easier repulsion.
Badminton Stringing Pattern ?... all models
- Thread starter biggybil
- Start date
PaitonSport
Regular Member
See below, new to uploading pictures so let me know if you are able to see it
[GALLERY=media, 932]64BADB7D-6EC3-4A9B-B462-9DDFCF5C62D3 by dm40 posted Mar 10, 2018 at 4:32 PM[/GALLERY]
This was just a trick to shorten the knots position. Somehow, its also give smaller chance to tension loss. Theorically, it doesn't give a natural proccess to tension balancing.
Lukas Nguyen
Regular Member
Hello together,
in 0:49 - any body know this Stringing Pattern?
I don't understand why the 3. cross row is missed
Thank you all
in 0:49 - any body know this Stringing Pattern?
I don't understand why the 3. cross row is missed
Thank you all
s_mair
Regular Member
Been discussed over and over again in several threads. It's an old school stringer's thing to simply skip the third to last cross there. Some say it brings a better feel, others claim it produces a better hitting sound, again others say it's a simple way to spare the lazy stringer to fight the shared holes there. Bottom line: Chances are high that it doesn't have any influence on performance at all but it has become a signature thing for TTY.
arundeep
Regular Member
here are babolat patterns from the latest catalogue on hungarian and US site. although I believe it is good to check the manufacturer website for new references, but sometimes people prefer BC 
I think it is easier and ok to use the recommended patterns on a given racket. But, for others situations when there are discussions about using a pattern based on holes for a racket, based on what does one select the pattern? other than comfort for the stringer.
e.g. if 1 piece stringing, then what would make one select between short side doing only mains, vs doing "n" number of crosses vs going across for the other main?
PS: I am new to the stringing world. I hope did not miss something which was already answered somewhere, but just I could not find or understood.
I think it is easier and ok to use the recommended patterns on a given racket. But, for others situations when there are discussions about using a pattern based on holes for a racket, based on what does one select the pattern? other than comfort for the stringer.
e.g. if 1 piece stringing, then what would make one select between short side doing only mains, vs doing "n" number of crosses vs going across for the other main?
PS: I am new to the stringing world. I hope did not miss something which was already answered somewhere, but just I could not find or understood.
Welcome to the world of the unanswerable questions most stringers have
Definite answers would require lots of scientific data, of which there is about none, so we are left to listen to our instincts and feelings.
Some patterns look better at preventing tension loss on the mains, or near the sweet spot, some are easier to execute...
The best advice I can give you is to try as many things as you can on your own rackets, but definitely use the recommended pattern on other people's rackets (if only for warranty purposes) unless instructed otherwise.
This is not even touching the subject of proportional stringing, which opens so many possibilities that it's hard to know what benefits it can really give and how to best tap into it.
Definite answers would require lots of scientific data, of which there is about none, so we are left to listen to our instincts and feelings.
Some patterns look better at preventing tension loss on the mains, or near the sweet spot, some are easier to execute...
The best advice I can give you is to try as many things as you can on your own rackets, but definitely use the recommended pattern on other people's rackets (if only for warranty purposes) unless instructed otherwise.
This is not even touching the subject of proportional stringing, which opens so many possibilities that it's hard to know what benefits it can really give and how to best tap into it.
arundeep
Regular Member
Well, pretty fair answer . I went the "easier to execute" way yesterday, while doing babolat i-pulse for crosses. I took me some time to decide that for me starting crosses on the bottom was easier than, starting from the middle. As I was not sure about the lengths to pick and also was not sure how the ups on downs on the mains will go when it comes to the top an bottom crosses.
As I started to get relaxed on watching the drop weight
, not missing to close the clamp 
and find a way to avoid looping string around machine 
, I believe, I should get better grasping other aspects of stringing.
and of course BC is and will be there for help.
. I went the "easier to execute" way yesterday, while doing babolat i-pulse for crosses. I took me some time to decide that for me starting crosses on the bottom was easier than, starting from the middle. As I was not sure about the lengths to pick and also was not sure how the ups on downs on the mains will go when it comes to the top an bottom crosses.As I started to get relaxed on watching the drop weight
, not missing to close the clamp and find a way to avoid looping string around machine , I believe, I should get better grasping other aspects of stringing. and of course BC is and will be there for help.
Last edited:
justplaynow77
Regular Member
Yes i would love to see this too.. the question being, my stringer just produced a different pattern than the one Mizuno put in their photos. Is it possible to happen, and is it going to cause damage to the racket?
s_mair
Regular Member
can you post some pictures of your racket's string job?
Normally, as long as the number of mains & crosses is correct and the stringer knows what he does, there shouldn't be any life threatening issues coming from different patterns.
Last edited:
justplaynow77
Regular Member
This is how it looks like.
So I guess it is possible for 1 racket type to be strung with different pattern. Wonder if there is any benefits in doing so?
s_mair
Regular Member
The resolution of that pic is really low - at least if I watch it over Tapatalk. Any chance to post a better one?
From what I can see, it looks like a complete 72 holes standard pattern. What is the difference to the pictures you've seen?
Every stringer has certain personal preferences in the details. It's perfectly normal that a stringer develops his preferred personal standard pattern and process over time which might deviate from the recommended patterns by the manufacturers. If all the crucial things are done correctly and the used pattern fits on the racket, there won't be any difference in how it plays or regarding frame safety.
justplaynow77
Regular Member
Yes I agree with you. It looks like the standard 72 holes pattern.
Here goes the "original" pattern:
s_mair
Regular Member
okay, now it's getting interesting. On the second picture, the racket clearly has a 76 hole pattern. You can easily see the difference in the angle of the last main strings: A significant angle on you racket whereas almost parallel on the second one. You're sure that both pics show the same racket?
Anyway, we definitely need higher resolution pictures of your racket that show some details like the 10/2 o'clock area and the positions of the knots.
justplaynow77
Regular Member
Check this out... looks like he does miss some holes. And yes both pics are the same racket Mizuno Carbosonic 79
Btw I count there are actually 72 grommets on this racket. I wonder how Mizuno can get this to have the 76 hole pattern.
Last edited:
They might be different version, since they don't have the same hole pattern (this one is 72 hole, the other is 76)
Looks like the top-most cross is indeed missing (7 holes skipped on each side instead of 6, plus only 21 cross) but the bottom is fine, 8 skipped holes (plus one between 10th and 11th main) is standard procedure for 72 holes.
At moderate tensions (9 or 10 kg) there's probably little to no risk for the frame. Above that I'd ask for a restring. As a stringer, I would restring rather than give this to my client, at any tension.
Looks like the top-most cross is indeed missing (7 holes skipped on each side instead of 6, plus only 21 cross) but the bottom is fine, 8 skipped holes (plus one between 10th and 11th main) is standard procedure for 72 holes.
At moderate tensions (9 or 10 kg) there's probably little to no risk for the frame. Above that I'd ask for a restring. As a stringer, I would restring rather than give this to my client, at any tension.
justplaynow77
Regular Member
9 or 10 kg... do you mind telling me what that is on lbs?
justplaynow77
Regular Member
Oh darn i need to have it restrung then.. mine is 24-25
s_mair
Regular Member
Mate, ever heard of a thing called Google?
1 kg = 2.2 lbs.
And jup, your racket misses the topmost cross string which could cause an premature breakage of the string because of a mishit at the top. I don't see any risk for the frame. Still, it makes me think why anyone misses such an obvious thing on such a super standard pattern. Go and ask your stringer about it and see what he says. For me, that would be a clear reason to ask for a new job free of charge.
The one strung at the bottom is an optional thing. Some stringers add it, some don't. Doesn't mate matter really since you pretty much never hit a shuttle around this area.
If they have indeed made an upgrade of the racket then this could explain the two different hole pattern seen in the two pics. But this will give both rackets different stringing patterns by definition.
s_mair
Regular Member
And while we're at it - the knots do look quite fishy. The top one got almost completely sucked into the grommet and normally, such big knots as seen at the bottom could mean that the stringer did a major no-no and strung the mains side-to-side instead of outwards from the middle. Do ask him about that too. Cause that is a thing the means a high risk for the frame.