Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Badminton Stringing Techniques & Tools' started by Antxn, Apr 19, 2021.
I measured it by hitting a shuttle . One piece was more mushy and had less ping.
In theory, 2 piece with 4 knots will lose more tension compared to 1 piece 2 knots.
Tension is lost from the knot not from after stringing, but from the knot tying process. After stringing, unless you really screw up the knot (which you didn't), the knot itself do not lose any tension. losing tension from the knot after stringing means that the string moves, which ultimately means the knot will go undone. That's not happening.
The tension loss is due to the process of tying the knot. It is almost impossible to not have any slack between the final clamp and the knot itself. By looking at the fixed clamp being pull back when releasing the base illustrates this.
1 piece 2 knot stringing will remove 2 knots locations where we have this tension loss during the stringing process.
As for testing the theory, it takes some care to construct the experiment. Firstly, all other process need to be identical, including any tension variations, stringer, stringing machine, etc. And of course, the racket and strings need to be identical. The only practical pattern that can test this theory is 2 piece bottom up, and 1 piece also bottom up. with the same change in tensioning.
The measurement will need to be done right after stringing, after resting (perhaps racket used next day), and then used interchangeably during one day of playing so they get similar play time. And then measured afterwards.
Play testing can also be done but not by the person who strung the racket. You need to find a few friends to alternately test the racket for you. and preferrably good players who has good feel of the racket. The testing player must not know what is being tested in order to eliminate any bias.
Only then will we be able to say if there are difference or not. Too often our judgements are skewed by having other variables in test. Ppl give rackets to a shop or gym and they have different ppl stringing it, and then the testing is done weeks/months apart in different condition. All those will change the accuracy of the evaluation.
I am currently in the process of testing small variations in stringing pattern and I am going through a similar process.
Can we make that post an auto-reply for everytime this topic is mentioned?
Any yet I'm still confident that we will see the first answers in the sense of "but a friend of my uncles co-worker, who lives next door to a member of the Yonex stringing team, says that it is the other way round. He couldn't explain why, but I believe him!" very soon. My trust and belief in the persuasive power of scientific arguments has dropped significantly during the past year.
This theory sounds plausible and the testing method seems right. We are finally able to play badminton again in the Netherlands. I could do such a test in the near future.
Sometimes it's simply not as easy to explain something scientifically. For example, if I'm correct, there is still no conclusive, scientific answer as to why you should or shouldn't add extra pounds on the crosses. One of the answers I see regularly is that doing square "simply works".
In my experience one piece seems to lose tension quicker than 2 piece stringing. Alan seems to think the same. But after he said it, all I heard were crickets. It's not by hearsay from a friend of an uncle's co-worker, who is a neighbore of an official Yonex stringer. It's by stringing by ourselves and experiencing a quicker drop in tension with the one piece.
However, I do agree that one test might not be enough. And using a stringing method (ATW) that I'm not used to might result in a different outcome compared to someone who is used to it. So, therefore I'm willing to do this test again with 2PBU and 1PBU, same rackets, same string, same tension. I'll let someone else play with them
The subject of what i call "tensioning pattern" is most complicated and as you said, there is no scientific evidence. In fact, the experiment I alluded to is to get some data on exactly that.
The theory I have though, makes it even more murky.
A lot of it has to do with that fact that everyone uses a different machine, and have variation in their stringing technique. Even if we limit to just one pattern, say standard vanilla Yonex pattern, there are tons and tons of variation.
Yonex recommendation is 10%, but why? how? where? the Yonex stringers all use Yonex machine which are build solid and have very little deformation when tensioned. Most of us are on lesser machine. Even my Gamma machine compresses the racket by 4mm and side support get stretched out 3mm after mains are tensioned at 23lbs. Once compressed, then tension changes. So different machine with different compression will have different tension variation.
And I can go on and on with how different techniques also changes the tension.
So Yonex recommends 10%, but that's hand wavy, incomplete and inaccurate.
As for the experiment, yes, 2PBU and 1PBU is the closest 1P/2P patterns for comparison. Their differences is really just the transition between mains and cross. If we use any other pattern, we will be comparison apple and oranges.
And let’s not forget routine and experience with the either pattern.
Alan @kakinami is an admitted 2-piece guy and has perfected his 2-piece workflow over many years and thousands and thousands of jobs. I don’t have a shadow of a doubt that his 2-piece jobs will be better and more consistent than any other pattern that he is far less used to.
However, that fact is only valid for him personally and doesn’t have any general implication.
To make the test even more complex, it would be necessary to do that test with more than one racket and/or string job. A single sample would be statistically worthless - just one simple mistake or a bad knot would ruin the whole result and lead to wrong conclusions.
So yeah… that a darn complicated test to do properly and scientifically correct.
There many ways we can evaluate a string job. Lots of the stuff we talk about here are actually just the basic elementary stuff. Following a pattern, getting strings correct and straight, tying a knot, etc. Or even trying to finish a racket within 30mins, 20min, 15mins!?
They are akin to driving without crashing into a wall. While very important, it doesn't determine if it is a good string job.
Another way to evaluate is consistency. That is not hard to do, just practicing a lot of and able to repeat a set of routines consistent. Any of us who has done 100+ stringjob should be able to do that.
The most important, but the most difficult to quantify, is the quality of the string job. They are stringjobs that just a few hits, you can tell it is done correctly. the shuttle flies off without effort, the impact feels and sound crisp. How to achieve that? trying to tie a pretty knot, or eliminating a crossover, or simply getting the strings straight isn't it. So far, I have talked to different stringers, and no one able to say how one does that. Yonex stringers? they will just blindly say, follow the yonex pattern. That's a blind following and we cannot derive any scientific learning from it.
Furthermore, As we know, AK doesn't follow Yonex pattern 100% either. (which brings out an interesting fact that I have never tried AK's stringing before, despite having seen him string tons of times)
The experiment I am doing isn't answering that holy grail answer either. It is a step towards it. I am merely trying to, within the confines of my own equipment (including my stringing machine, my rackets, my strings) what variation in tensioning pattern, or any other variation in technique makes a better feeling racket. I have done limited experiment like that before, but not as rigorously as I plan to.
I said it is not the holy grail answer because I cannot extrapolate my learning to be more generalize. And honestly I doubt one can ever be. People who claim they can are merely not understanding the nature of the question, the nature of the mechanism, or the extensively of the experiment needed. I can only claim that with the equipment I have, using a certain flow will give the best feel.
I am starting with a pair of re-released white ARC10 from a few years ago. They will be strung with ZM62Fire and target tension will be ~23lbs. I am varying tension and other little things each couple of weeks. In between I bring the rackets to the courts and try them out and also let other try them out. Needless to say, each datapoint takes weeks to gather and it is painful process.
The person I know is my mother's sister,daughter's, aunt, son who strings rackets and is probably the worst person to ask advice from. =P
Sent from my LG-US998 using Tapatalk
I would have loved to participate in this =(
I think as a stringer like you @kwun it is difficult to let anyone else touch your rackets. I wouldn't feel comfortable playing with a racket strung ny someone else =)
Sent from my LG-US998 using Tapatalk
I think I know that guy. He's just terrible!
I'm kind of torn apart with this. On one hand, I'm super curious to see the results. On the other, I'm not sure if it is worth all the effort in the end since the results would have very limited general validity.
Also, I wouldn't be that interested in the player's feedback but more focussed on the development of the ping frequencies over time and usage. That would at least give tendency in the initial question on the level of tension loss. That whole "feel"-thing is then another, even bigger can of worms to open up.
Ultimately, I also think that it would be too hard to get general validity. Too many factors weighing in. Many (good) stringers would have to participate and be equally used to stringing one piece and two piece. Probably, in the end it will be everyone's personal "truth" as one person will get better results doing the one or the other. And this doesn't make his/her conclusion wrong. This is at least true for people who string their own rackets, or players who have only one stringer they can go to.
However, I still wonder: Theoreticaly, if you could say that stringer X is indeed very good and equally used to both one piece and two piece stringing. He does this test with identical rackets, string and tension right after each other. The flow during stringing both rackets is (near) perfect. No misstakes were made, like needing extra time because of misweaves, or messing up with tying knots etc, etc. And in the end, one stringjob does lose tension quicker than the other. Couldn't you generally say that indeed 1P stringjob, or 2P stringjob, loses tension quicker? Because the perfect test would have to be "ceteris paribus" or "all other factors being the same". You can have 100 stringers joining the test, but if half of them wouldn't have (near) perfect flow and 0 mistakes during both stringjobs, how reliable is the test? But then again, maybe that's why you would need many many stringers to join the test...
And what do you mean by "feel"-thing? If you mean "pushing the strings with your hands", then yes, I agree with you. But I would think most people just say feel while they mean listening to the ping by hitting the hand or just listening during play. That is at least what I meant in earlier post. And I believe you can also "feel" a difference in tension, simply by playing. Maybe not so with very small differences, and it's always in combination with hearing the ping.
I'd say to check the "A loses more tension then B" theory it would be enough to have a handful of experienced and consistent stringers doing the experiment. To make things super simple, maybe it would be enough to only keep track of the ping frequency decline over certain periods of time without even playing the racket. Sure it would be more realistic to actually use both rackets on court, but that's the point where you add a lot of uncertainty to the equation. Have both rackets been played the same amount of time? With the same amount of force? The same shuttles? Same climate? Etc., etc.,...
So maybe a first and rather simple experiment would be:
- string two identical rackets with the same string, one 2-piece, the other 1-piece
- keep them stored in the same conditions and measure the ping every x days
- check the curves and the percentage of tension that has been lost over a period y
This could be done by several stringers independently from each other and then sharing their data afterwards.
I mean the whole topic like "this string job offers a better feel/more repulsion/more power/more control than the other one".
So basically all the quality ratings that cannot be measured but only rely on personal impressions and feelings of the player. I think it's impossible to draw any scientific conclusions from personal impressions and to neutrally determine if job A is better than B.
Ah ok. This experiment is perhaps indeed more simple and better. Although somehow I'd like to add some hitting action, to see how the strings react to the vibrations. I understand that it would be very difficult to do that under the same conditions.
And I also don't believe in stringing method A providing better feel, control etc. than stringing method B. That's very subjective and personal. Same as "solid feel racket". But I think nobody implied that in this thread. Antxn just asked what he could do to minimize tension loss. That is something you can measure, as you pointed out yourself, by measuring the ping.
I was referring to this part of @kwun's post:
The discussion when a bit OT from the original tension-loss question there.
that's absolutely correct. the exact result is as mentioned, very specific to my equipment and my flow. However, the methodology of getting there might have some general application.
it depends on the goal of the experiment. you seem to be more interested in the tension retension. while i am more interested in the feel (yes i am off-topic here). I will give more thoughts on that in the next reply to Dekkert's post.
yes it is subjective, but it is there. Many years ago, I used to have a regular customer who, after i changed stringing machine, complained that the stringjob don't come out as lively anymore. I personally also felt the same. I had to experiment and adjust the stringing flow in order to get back the same lively feel. Although hard to quantify, that shouldn't stop us from trying to improve it. It is definitely real As a stringer we should always try to improve our string job.
Out of curiosity, what did you do to adjust your workflow? I am fairly knew to stringing, at around 50 stringjob, and for now, I only know one method. Sorry about this off topic
I agree that it is there and I kind of stated that in my earlier post:
As a good practise to get back into stringing, I decided to have a go at this. I lent two Victor Super Inside Waves 36 from a club mate and strung them back to back with Adidas Wucht P68 strings. Now I will store them both together and measure the ping every day.
I'll start a separate thread once I have gathered some useful information in case others want to add their results later on too. That's where it would become really interesting.