maybe he has perfect pitch. you never know. however, i do believe that the tone and quality of the tone at the end of the stringjob is vital to the liveliness and playabilty of the stringbed. if at the end of the stringjob, tap the racket, if the result tone is a long and resonate nicely, the stringjob is usually lively. if it is thud that dies down quickly, the stringjob is not very lively. and i say usually as i have had cases where that isn't the case. === and this also brings up the point, there are different ways to grade the quality of a stringjob, most people will grade it by "tangible" things like how good the knots are, what pattern, cross over. but to me that's only the surface of it. the real quality is how lively the stringbed is and it is not something that one can see from inspection alone. you need to hit with the string to actually feel how well it plays.
Re long and resonant ping (lots of news on pings recently ) and lively stringbed, I think you're onto something there. Perhaps it's because all the strings (mains and crosses) are at the same tension and so ping at the same frequency, with little cross cancellation, thus leading to a long resonant tone. And having same tension in all strings likely mean a well coordinated stringbed with very predictable and repeatable rebound throughout the whole bed.
we talked about it a couple of years ago. but the thread didn't get too much traction. http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php/111162-ping-tail-and-quality-of-stringing
Yep, I remember. I was the last one to comment. If only there was a way to measure the ping decay. Perhaps half life? That is, time from initial loudness in dB to half or quarter dB? You'd need a frequency analyzer / recorder app.
The difficulty with judging this video is that we do not have explanation to support the method. Without going into the old chestnut of top down, bottom up approach, usually as stringers we like to make sense of a technique that may be different. I agree with many that speed is not important, especially to the detriment of quality. Mark knows that despite my 25 years experience I had things happen to me whilst stringing at All Englands that I'd never come across before. This was a combination of not knowing the stringing machine well enough and stringing at the higher tensions. I'm not sure what makes this stringer a "master." Maybe there are plausible explanations for what he does, that we can't fathom. Maybe it's just his way and he's incredibly consistent. Sadly, we can't fill in the gaps and this is going to bother us. For me, and let's get back to what really matters, players require a good job and consistency. They like the confidence in knowing that they get the same result time after time and that's why they give us their business. Perhaps this is where this particular stringer has earned his Master title. Perhaps it's because he has strung for Yonex for 25 years or something. I enjoyed watching the video for curioscity purposes. I'll still string my way after watching the video but there are one or two elements I'll test to see if there's a difference. However, apart from the opening crosses, I will not pull two strings together, especially mains strings. Paul www.badmintn-coach.co.uk
and that really is the problem with badminton stringing, or in fact, in some ways, badminton in general. there are very little science, and a lot of apprenticeship / black art. every company comes up with their own variation of stringing pattern for the sake of being "different"; every stringer has their own style or variation in their technique. yet, no one can say why or more importantly, scientifically prove why their method is better. and there are very few discussions and sharing of ideas between different stringers, so some comes up with skipping strings, some skipping pull, some pluck strings, some do this and that. yet, no one can say, which is the "correct" method. who is a master stringer? probably the guy who has been around the longest, and know the Yonex bosses the best. but he probably uses his own developed techniques from the past 20 yrs, and who is to argue with him? he has been around 20 more years than us and everyone trusts what he do. perhaps it is better, but will he be able to tell / prove us why?
If I had to define "master", I'd say it's somebody who does it fast and consistently and well; any on its own is fairly easy, two of them is trickier, but all three is the mark of the pro.
I don't have enough of the same racket, but it would be interesting if someone had say 10 of the same racket and strung them all in a different way and give them to a clued up group at the club to test. Just put numbered stickers at the bottom so the player has no idea what is what. String one fast, one slow, one with double pulls one andy ellis style, one just really badly, one haribito, yonex, 50/50 etc etc maybe more than 10. Same night, same shuttles, same exact conditions. See what comes back.(testers would all have to usually play a similar tension). Get someone to switch the stickers around take a note and you can test them blind also.
This could actually possibly me done at my club, however I don't think I could personally be bothered restringing 10 carlton rackets just to test haha, but if i have free time this could be a possibility!
I hate to toot the UK horns but IMO the UK has the best stringers in the world, unfortunately one migrated to Portugal =) Look at what is said about the All Englands, the most prestigious tournament (Played every year). Quality of play is the best, so stringing services have to be the best.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=10150302731986948&set=vb.591276947&type=3&theater I call it the Toshi knot, a modified Parnell knot. I saw a pic of me at his elbow in this video!! =)
You know, I think he plucks it because of habit rather than any useful purpose. It's quite possible he first strung racquets handheld. There was no way to verify the tension in the string except by plucking the string. He's never broken the habit and now still does it on machines. The other reason is that he knows he's being filmed and plucking the strings to show off a bit.
Well, I tried a first-mains double pull against a first-mains single pull... and found absolutely no difference in the resulting finished stringbeds - apparently, not enough tension is lost around that first "corner" to have any impact. The WISE pulls a bit longer, as expected, but that's about it, so I'm happy to keep going with it. (Obviously this technique is a complete no-no for crank machines, but ECP's can compensate, especially with prestretch turned on.) If somebody else can do the comparison, I would be interested in the results.
I'd question how much benefit you'd gain from pulling two strings? It may be a bit quicker but there is a lot more strain in the string (due to longer length to tension), meaning the string is potentially cutting into the grommets more. With single string tensioning, the strain and therefore the amount of "sawing action" that the grommets experience is only in the length of string between the last clamp and the grommet in the string you are tensioning, that could be only 1-2inches of string. However in 2-string tensioning, the distance between the last clamp and the grommet in the string you are applying direct tension to is much longer, perhaps 6-7 inches of string. Therefore the strain that takes place is a lot more, meaning more abrasion of the grommet(s). Probably not too much of a concern if done occasionally and the grommets are well maintained, but I'd personally prefer to stick with tensioning one string at a time.
with the greatest respect , i don't think he is that great for one very important reason he didn't release the clamp base before he release the clamp and that is very dangerous and may damage the string. i vote AK as my choice of having both quality and speed
You realize that all high end stringing machines purposely make the stringer release the clamp before the clamp base, right ? It does not damage the strings other than in very specific conditions (that should not happen anyways).
