Interview with Tim Willis & Tobias Wadenka | German Open '22

[s_mair]

Just watched this clip and thought it might be interesting for other BCers as well. Enjoy.



5:20 - Pre-Stretch:
Has anyone in her ever noticed a difference in the hitting sound when using PS? I haven't. I mean, it pings slightly higher but that doesn't make it sound "better", right?
Amazing that there are still so many myths circling around even amongst the pros (stringers and players) that just don't hold up to any scientific check.

 

[kwun]

Agree. In fact, we go way more detail in this forum. We haven't even seen many so called pros come in here.

And how's adding 10% cross tension equivalent to pre-stretch? it is not even the same thing.

 

[s_mair]

And how's adding 10% cross tension equivalent to pre-stretch?

I can make sense of that, at least in parts. The friction with the main strings will keep a certain amount of the extra PS-tension in the string. So the effective tension will not fully bounce back to the nominal value but will stay at nominal+x. What I don't like about it is that this x will not be consistent and will change depending on the string position (number of mains it is woven through) and the roughness of the string.

IMO pre-stretch just adds another factor to the whole equation with effects that are not fully controllable. And personally, that's a thing I don't like.

 

[Cheung]

Amazing that there are still so many myths circling around even amongst the pros (stringers and players) that just don't hold up to any scientific check.

I would hazard a guess that most players and coaches haven’t had rigorous scientific training in laboratories nor human studies. I once reviewed a proposal for examining the effect of yoga on badminton training. It wasn’t very good. I imagine stringing is the same.

 

[thyrif]

I can make sense of that, at least in parts. The friction with the main strings will keep a certain amount of the extra PS-tension in the string. So the effective tension will not fully bounce back to the nominal value but will stay at nominal+x. What I don't like about it is that this x will not be consistent and will change depending on the string position (number of mains it is woven through) and the roughness of the string.

IMO pre-stretch just adds another factor to the whole equation with effects that are not fully controllable. And personally, that's a thing I don't like.

I imagine it differs a lot for different strings as well

 

[Jonno22]

So unless I'm mistaken, if the Yonex stringing team are asked to do a 30lb restring when just 1 tension is given (ignoring pre stretch) for a Yonex racquet they would do Mains 30 Crosses 33. However for a non Yonex racquet they would do Mains 29 Crosses 31. Have I understood that correctly as there seems to be quite a difference there?

 

[s_mair]

So unless I'm mistaken, if the Yonex stringing team are asked to do a 30lb restring when just 1 tension is given (ignoring pre stretch) for a Yonex racquet they would do Mains 30 Crosses 33. However for a non Yonex racquet they would do Mains 29 Crosses 31. Have I understood that correctly as there seems to be quite a difference there?

Yes, that's how he explained it. Doesn't make any sense. The non-Yonex players will simply end up with softer strings than Yonex players in that scenario which is... weird.

 

[Jonno22]

Yes, that's how he explained it. Doesn't make any sense. The non-Yonex players will simply end up with softer strings than Yonex players in that scenario which is... weird.

Yes that's what I thought, didn't make sense to me!

 

[kaffars]

Interesting, did anyone watch part 2? Where they start on the crosses they don't tie off and anchor on the mains but twist several times to create an anchor instead? Reasons as when you start pulling the crosses it can damage the mains?

And then coming back down from the top not tying off at the top as well.

 

[Jonno22]

Interesting, did anyone watch part 2? Where they start on the crosses they don't tie off and anchor on the mains but twist several times to create an anchor instead? Reasons as when you start pulling the crosses it can damage the mains?

And then coming back down from the top not tying off at the top as well.

I first heard about reversing the final 3 crosses last summer when Tim did a Zoom with Paul Stewart which is still on Pauls Youtube channel. I thought they only did it on Aerobite and Aerobite Boost because Aerobite string is fragile so it was breaking a lot of strings when tying off on the mains. Interesting it said for high tensions too in the video though.

I've never been able to get my head around the non anchored cross start but again I've seen it mentioned in videos but never understood how to do it

 

[thyrif]

Interesting, did anyone watch part 2? Where they start on the crosses they don't tie off and anchor on the mains but twist several times to create an anchor instead? Reasons as when you start pulling the crosses it can damage the mains?

And then coming back down from the top not tying off at the top as well.

I do the same on the top now when I use Aerobite: reverse the top 2-3 strings and tie off in the highest side shared grommet on the cross string.
Here they reverse the top 4, also fine I guess. With 2-3 I have minimal outside runs of the string.
I only use it on aerobite, but have been thinking to use it on all my stringing, as I really hate tying off at the top, there's no space!

I've hardly ever had a string break near the bottom cross knot. So I don't bother with this suggestion.

 

[s_mair]

Interesting, did anyone watch part 2? Where they start on the crosses they don't tie off and anchor on the mains but twist several times to create an anchor instead? Reasons as when you start pulling the crosses it can damage the mains?

And then coming back down from the top not tying off at the top as well.

Great timing, that one came out just as couple of hours ago.

I know they are professional and all, but for the life of me, I don’t like the knotting. Especially not that ugly unanchord thing they use as starters. Sure, for them it’s all about efficiency. Doing 35+ jobs a day is just absolute madness.

Doing the top ones reverse is an interesting option, but I already know that my OCD will cry itself to sleep because of those extra long parts of slack string on the outside.

 

[Mark A]

Interesting, did anyone watch part 2? Where they start on the crosses they don't tie off and anchor on the mains but twist several times to create an anchor instead? Reasons as when you start pulling the crosses it can damage the mains?

Yes - tying on is now deprecated by Yonex because the anchor puts stress on the mains... but in the 1000+ rackets I strung I never once popped a main. And we're talking 30+ lb with a pull on the first cross. The trick is to get a starting knot that's big, but also slides.

And then coming back down from the top not tying off at the top as well.

I absolutely hate this - there is a grommet at the top that's dedicated to a top knot, and having a knot that's

1. that far into the sweetspot, and
2. on a shared hole

disgusts me.

 

[kaffars]

Yes - tying on is now deprecated by Yonex because the anchor puts stress on the mains... but in the 1000+ rackets I strung I never once popped a main. And we're talking 30+ lb with a pull on the first cross. The trick is to get a starting knot that's big, but also slides.

I absolutely hate this - there is a grommet at the top that's dedicated to a top knot, and having a knot that's

1. that far into the sweetspot, and
2. on a shared hole

disgusts me.

So is all of this the official Yonex stringing 'pattern' now?...

I share your feelings too.

 

[kwun]

I do the same on the top now when I use Aerobite: reverse the top 2-3 strings and tie off in the highest side shared grommet on the cross string.
Here they reverse the top 4, also fine I guess. With 2-3 I have minimal outside runs of the string.
I only use it on aerobite, but have been thinking to use it on all my stringing, as I really hate tying off at the top, there's no space!

I've hardly ever had a string break near the bottom cross knot. So I don't bother with this suggestion.

I have been doing top 2 reverse and tie on the first shared home for years. Top 4 is interesting.

Seems that Yonex stringers do do some innovative things instead of just blindly following the Yonex pattern like they used to.

 

[kakinami]

Yes - tying on is now deprecated by Yonex because the anchor puts stress on the mains... but in the 1000+ rackets I strung I never once popped a main. And we're talking 30+ lb with a pull on the first cross. The trick is to get a starting knot that's big, but also slides.

I absolutely hate this - there is a grommet at the top that's dedicated to a top knot, and having a knot that's

1. that far into the sweetspot, and
2. on a shared hole

disgusts me.

I am one of those dumbass who break main from the knots. I prefer Mark Lawrence style using a starting clamp and going back to do a finishing knot like most tennis professional stringers do. I just recently changed to finishing knots instead of starting knots, I should have done long ago, I never thought of doing tennis stringing with badminton, I have implemented badminton techniques with tennis but not really the other way around.
Have not watched part 2 yet but as a tennis stringer we as much as we can tie the mains on the mains and the crosses on the crosses. My boss's theory is that the strings that move the most are yoyr main strings, they do most of the work in your stringbed so tying a knot dampens them, making it harder for them to work/perform. I am sure the ball is heavier than a shuttle and there is less movement in strings than tennis but I try to share my logic from my tennis stringing to my badminton stringing and vise versa. I am sure I am wrong on this, just an old school stringer. Wakaka =P

Sent from my LG-US998 using Tapatalk

 

[Mark A]

I am one of those dumbass who break main from the knots.

I was either lucky or good, because that never once happened to me in all my rackets.

I prefer Mark Lawrence style using a starting clamp and going back to do a finishing knot like most tennis professional stringers do.

If the knot is in the right place, I've nothing against this besides the fact that I was never comfortable using starting clamps against badminton frames.
Tennis frames are so over-built, in comparison, that you can do pretty much anything you want.

 

[Dekkert]

I also do the top two crosses reverse for maybe a year now. It's also necessary because I have no space due to the clamp so close to the frame. Tie-off at the top shared hole. Might try this 4-5 cross reverse. The tie-off knot is closer to the last cross, just one hole next to it. That's less slack string on the outside.

The weird starting knot I tried once. Couldn't get a nice compact "ball". Just stick to anchoring the starting knot.

Doing the top ones reverse is an interesting option, but I already know that my OCD will cry itself to sleep because of those extra long parts of slack string on the outside.

Actually that isn't slack string. It is tensioned. Maybe a bit less because of more friction, but still tensioned. Main disadvantage is that that part of the string might break earlier due to picking up the shuttle. You can just think about that when picking up shuttles. When others don't do that, well... it's better for business!

 

[s_mair]

Actually that isn't slack string. It is tensioned. Maybe a bit less because of more friction, but still tensioned. Main disadvantage is that that part of the string might break earlier due to picking up the shuttle. You can just think about that when picking up shuttles. When others don't do that, well... it's better for business!

Slack is the wrong word. I mean just „dead“ pieces of string on the outside of the racket. My mantra there is „the less the better“.

And a good point with the shuttle scooping issue. Sure, this won’t bother the pros but might be a real issue for the average mortal player.

 

[Michael Boyle]

I also tried the "beehive" knot Tim mentioned but it looked sort of a mess. I did move to an unanchored starting knot for the crosses, but it is the "make two loops and then loop through them twice" knot mentioned in a previous Yonex "how to string a racquet" video. I actually like that a lot more than starting with a Toshi/Gudgeon knot because it needs a lot less string to tie it, it is quick, and it doesn't look too awful despite being unanchored.

I am curious though, as more "high tension specific" techniques are adopted, do you have any tension/string thickness/racquet quality rules where you switch over, or just do all racquets more or less the same for the sake of a consistent outcome regardless of requested tension? It feels a little weird to double pull last mains and starting cross for BG-65 at 24lbs for a professional grade racquet, to provide an extreme example.