Wilson Baiardo for badminton stringing

[hjembaek]

I wish you luck fitting the piano wheels, did you get Wilson loadspreaders with your machine & if so are these available separately ? I use the inexpensive ones sold on EBay, but they don’t last too long.

Yes I have the Wilson loadspreaders and they are excellent and made in quality ABS plastics - so I think they will last a long time.

However I asked my dealer if I could buy some extra Wilson badminton loadspreaders as spares - but you can't - it is only sold in a complete accessory kit which is about 200 euros.

 

[Redaudi02]

Thanks for your reply. I am going to ask my original supplier who is a Wilson Ambassador & tennis coach / agent in the South of England who may be able to get me one or two ? Probably doubtful, but will give him a try.
My machine included 2 tools storage units + set of tools but no load spreaders at that time, presume they have included it on the newer machines.
I don’t find the cheaper ones sold on E bay last for very long. ABS ones would be really useful.

 

[mokomima]

Here is a very good review of the Wilson Baiardo and some really nice pictures courtesy of Martin Creasey a stringer from the UK:


Wilson Baiardo for Badminton a review by Martin Creasey
A few points specific to badminton. (see attached photos)

The machine itself is VERY heavy. It comes in two boxes and the main box in particular needs at least two people to remove the machine and lift it. (47 KG) I had to get it upstairs and it nearly killed me!

Once set up it is very stable and the best feature of the basic machine is that you can customise the height and angle for several different users and for each user you can select a different height and angle for mounting the racket, cross strings and main strings. Badminton rackets have a lot more complicated weaving than other sports and it is very useful to be able to raise the string bed closer to you to do this work. If you do many rackets this really helps avoid back strain and fatigue.

There are two sets of arms for the 12 and 6 o'clock mounting points. The long ones are for badminton and the short ones for other sports. These are really easy to change over and also they are very easy to adjust for each individual racket to make sure the 4 side arms locate in exactly the right place so they do not block one of the critical double grommet holes. Each racket is a bit different and this has proved very valuable. There are a range of fixings to go on these arms to suit all types of racket including two fixings specifically to suit badminton and spread the load at the top and bottom of the racket.

The four side arms are equally easy to apply to the frame. I know this seems silly but the smoothness of operation is the difference between a BMW and a Fiat! Real quality. This is true of the whole machine and for me was a unexpected improvement after my old machine. It really is top quality engineering.

The strings clamps are absolutely top quality too. You can fix the bases with less than a quarter turn with one hand with a click lock to secure them. They have quick releases so that when you undo the string clamp it drops and automatically releases the base. Alternatively there is quick release button to release the base. Once fixed the clamps do not move on the base or the string. Both bases and string sections are easily adjustable. I find I never have to adjust the base clamps. I usually check the string clamps before each racket stringing to ensure they will firmly grip the string gauge I am using.

The same clamps work fine for all types of racket and seem to be designed firstly for badminton which surprised me. The teeth are the perfect distance apart for holding badminton cross strings.

I'm sure you have already found that some rackets with non isometric heads have strings that come together slightly at the head. With this type of racket I find the main strings are sometimes slightly distorted by the clamps as I start the cross strings. I always start the cross strings at the top so if this is an issue the distortion does not happen when the racket is at nearly full tension. This slight distortion sorts itself out as you move further down the cross strings and it is not a problem. I always do a final check at the end to ensure all strings are lying straight in the stringbed. This issue does not seem to occur in more modern truly isometric shaped rackets where the clamps sit perfectly in the paralell main strings. This is of course an issue with the rackets not the machine. All machines will have the same problem with these (often cheaper) rackets..

Further notes and loadspreaders and head/throat towers
The machine comes with all the spreaders and frame mounts you could possibly need for all sports. This includes the badminton specific spreaders which are absolutely fine. Better in my view than the generic white spreaders you can buy at W&D and elsewhere.

To answer another person's comments, you don't move the Towers (as on cheap machines) when you change rackets. There are specific longer mounting posts for badminton which put the smaller frame in the middle of the machine (but can be adjusted to get optimal positioning for the side arms) .

View attachment 189636 View attachment 189637 View attachment 189638 View attachment 189639 View attachment 189640 View attachment 189641

Never string a racket from top to bottom!!! Always from bottom to top. Especially with higher tension this is important.

 

[fanfaron]

I always string bottom - top because people here says it can break rackets. But from people stringing top - bottom, they don't seem to mind. I can't afford to break a racket, I charge so low if I break a racket, all my profit will be gone in no time. I also string on a prince 2 points machine which is scary.

Can someone who string top-bottom chime up to say how many racket they break? Maybe we should start a thread about top-bottom or bottom. Or a survey...

It would be good to clarify if it's really safe top-bottom.

 

[Redaudi02]

Let me say that I have strung rackets for customers over the last 16 years always top down, & have never broken a single rkt frame, over that time I have used an Exthree 2600, 6 point manual machine & over the last 3 years the Wilson Baiardo Electronic machine. It is important to examine each frame carefully for cracks before stringing, & to ensure it is not a fake, & if you follow this I feel that there should be few problems. Of course you need to be particularly careful that string tensions are within guidelines or at least no more than 10% above the maximum. It’s really all down to experience.

 

[crufti]

Yes, think a separate thread could clear a bit on the question of top/down or bot/up.
If arguments of tennis stringer are valid for t/d, why is that different to badminton rackets. Do both rackets not having the weakest points on top? Or do they have a different force accumulation because of design difference?
Tennis stringers can not understand the badmintion opinion.
Would good to find an explanation.
Greetings

 

[Redaudi02]

Agree, my experience is almost entirely badminton rackets. The top of the racket is certain to be weaker than the bottom on both tennis & badminton, but a 6 point machine protects all frames very well under tension providing frames are not cracked, & the tensions are not too excessive.
I believe Yonex first introduced the top down instruction for badminton rackets around 2010, maybe they were having too many sent back for replacement ?

 

[speCulatius]

It would have been more obvious with older racket models, but it's still true for these modern rackets and I didn't want anyone to complain that it's different for modern rackets. The Tennis racket is narrower at the top, while the badminton racket is narrower at the bottom. Of course, there's exceptions to this, but this is still true for the great majority of racket heads.
Another difference is the split shaft of the tennis racket making it even stronger at the bottom half of the head.

Do you need more differences between Badminton and tennis rackets to justify a different approach to string them?

Furthermore, most of the time, a racket is not being strung, but played and the stress on the frame is less/more evenly distributed around the frame when it's in its original shape, so the question is how to preserve the original shape of the racket.
It has been discussed many times around here and it's quite easy to imagine what happens when pulling the cross strings. Remember, the sides of the racket are supported on the outside, not the inside. When a string is pulled, the frame is compressed in the area of that string, then you pull the next string and it's compressed there, and so on. When starting at the narrower part of the head, you start with the shortest string making the narrowest part even narrower. When moving to the next strings, the frame is slightly distorted. this leads to the forces pointing more outwards leading to less compression. This continues with each string until you reach the widest part of the head leading to a pear like head shape with the top being narrower than before and the bottom being similar to the original shape.
When starting at the bottom, the same happens, but not to the same extend and it will leave the top of the frame (Weaker? Maybe. Certainly more prone to irregular stress) in its original shape.

If you want to argue against this, I know there's a lot of details missing here, but either think about it extensively, run a simulation on what happens with the shape of the frame or just try it first.

 

[fanfaron]

Agree, my experience is almost entirely badminton rackets. The top of the racket is certain to be weaker than the bottom on both tennis & badminton, but a 6 point machine protects all frames very well under tension providing frames are not cracked, & the tensions are not too excessive.
I believe Yonex first introduced the top down instruction for badminton rackets around 2010, maybe they were having too many sent back for replacement ?

How about the risk of stringing in two points machine. I noticed when stringing tennis racket if I do one piece and start de main from the bottom. The racket becomes squashed and the form is oval(very ugly, deserved to be on the wall of shame....). If I do around the world and the cross start from the top then the shape is good. I did a few times in tennis but no more. I was lucky it doesn't break. Even if tennis racket is tougher than badminton the tennis tension is twice as high so still can break. Maybe two points machines has to be more careful. Do you agree?

 

[kwun]

what @speCulatius shows. the "bulge" at 4/8 oclock is a stress point in the frame and stringing top down on a badminton racket magnifies excessive stress at that point if not properly supported.

 

[Redaudi02]

Some very useful analysis here & food for thought. I certainly feel that 2 point machines with very high tensions are quite risky for badminton rackets, the frame shape changes to round & is only restored when the crosses are pulled with at least 2lbs extra tension back to the correct oval shape. This stresses the frame which is not good. In my experience using only 2 point supports means the stringer can restring faster & more rackets means more profit ? However this is very risky & I would certainly not wish for my rackets to be strung in this manner. I believe a stringer can quickly lose his reputation if speed & profit is the priority. Dissatisfied customers using social media can quickly ruin a good reputation when things go wrong.

 

[kwun]

agree. most frames are fine even with 2 point support. however, there are some softer and thinner frames which are very dangerous when strung top-down and/or 2 points. so be very very careful if you are stringing those frames.

 

[Redaudi02]

Yes of course you are right Kwun, you have to be very careful with all players rackets, maybe it’s time I made some changes & revert to bottom up for the cross strings.

 

[RacketStringer]

I string mainly badminton racquets and also quite a lot of squash racquets. I would think the Baiardo Lite is a better machine for badminton than the full Baiardo since the lite version does have movable towers which were presumably specifically incorporated in the design for small headed racquets such as badminton. Some have mentioned it’s not necessary to have movable towers, I would disagree with them and now that Wilson has incorporated movable towers in the Lite machine’s design then it seems Wilson agree with me on this point. I learnt to string via the UKRSA and I’m sure that they stated you should always string crosses from top down and that is indeed what others recommend, see for the Parnell advice and explanation for stringing top down so I have no idea why some on here are saying stringing crosses from the bottom up is preferable. I will go out of my way to string them from the top down, even using an around the world pattern to achieve this if necessary. Just my thoughts and I am sure that I will get a lot of people comment who disagree but I am simply stating how I was taught to do it.

 

[Kaelhdris]

We all say to go bottom up for the crosses because we're talking about badminton rackets, as experience has showed that it is safer.
Tennis rackets are usually strung top down, but they are much more resistant

 

[RacketStringer]

We all say to go bottom up for the crosses because we're talking about badminton rackets, as experience has showed that it is safer.
Tennis rackets are usually strung top down, but they are much more resistant

As I said I mainly string badminton racquets and as you can imagine quite a few of them over the past 12 years I have been stringing. The course I went on never suggested bottom up crosses for badminton and top down for everything else. Maybe I should switch to bottom up crosses then for badminton? Fortunately I haven’t had any issues apart from one racquet that had a pre-existing crack and that wouldn’t have survived the stringing process whether the crosses were done up or down even on my 6 point clamp machine.

 

[Kaelhdris]

If i'm not mistaken, it used to be that every manufacturer instructed top-down crosses, but with tensions getting higher and higher at the pro level it appeared that top-down was breaking a lot of rackets, while bottom-up wasn't.

I think it makes sense too, as Mr. Parnell said, you want to go top down to limit deformation by pushing the stress towards the bottom part of the racket that is less likely to deform, but if it has less room to deform it also means it is more likely to break, which can be a problem with the thin badminton frames.

I wouldn't dare to tell you what you should or shouldn't do, but that is the story we have passed down for many generations (or at least a few years )

 

[kakinami]

If i'm not mistaken, it used to be that every manufacturer instructed top-down crosses, but with tensions getting higher and higher at the pro level it appeared that top-down was breaking a lot of rackets, while bottom-up wasn't.

I think it makes sense too, as Mr. Parnell said, you want to go top down to limit deformation by pushing the stress towards the bottom part of the racket that is less likely to deform, but if it has less room to deform it also means it is more likely to break, which can be a problem with the thin badminton frames.

I wouldn't dare to tell you what you should or shouldn't do, but that is the story we have passed down for many generations (or at least a few years )

Sometimes you can't teach an old dog new tricks. When people are set in their old ways, if it ain't broke, then why fix it? Mentality, when I was taught back then that is how it should be. To be honest I was the same way. I do it like this, my customers don't complain, they keep coming back for my services, if it ain't broke, then why fix it?

Then thinking about, I do these things while stringing tennis rackets, why don't I try this? Then playtesting my work brought new ideas to ny stringing. Maybe unfortunately he doesn't play badminton, so to go on the court and feel his own work, it is only a job to him not a passion like most badminton stringers. I can do a 16 x 18 tennis racket in 15 minutes (or squash, maybe less) but a 22x21 badminton racket takes me double the time to string. If that is his mindset, I can understand seeing stringing as a job to make money to pay the bills. Badminton stringers who play tend to be more creative about their stringing and have more passion for their stringing, thinking how can I improve this? What will make this feel better? On the court you can ask these questions, standing behind a machine thinking about my next cheeseburger, where it is going to come from? You only see the money how you are going to pay for it. BTW, I actually do both of those things.

Sent from my SC-01L using Tapatalk

 

[George Idicula]

As the request as one of the BC user, I made the project- custom side supports for Wilson Baiardo.
At the beginning of the next week I am sending the versions for testing.

Photos- progress of work two weeks before.

And final appearance below

Woah that is pretty cool. Any chance you could make this for me too for a not too bad price?

 

[kakinami]

Agree, my experience is almost entirely badminton rackets. The top of the racket is certain to be weaker than the bottom on both tennis & badminton, but a 6 point machine protects all frames very well under tension providing frames are not cracked, & the tensions are not too excessive.
I believe Yonex first introduced the top down instruction for badminton rackets around 2010, maybe they were having too many sent back for replacement ?

2005 after the World Championships. An American stringer broke 3 rackets in a row for a Korean player going top down 33 pounds and then the head stringer said go bottom up and no problem.

Sent from my SC-01L using Tapatalk