Mens Tennis Forums banner

Do you use anti-vibe?

11K views 32 replies 18 participants last post by  bonzile 
#1 ·
I feel better when I play without the anti-vibe thing on my racquet, but I've read in some places that the anti-vibe is good for the elbows and etc. I wonder if thats really a 'MUST USE'. I play like 3-4 times a week 1h max each day.

If anyone has an article in mind about that, please tell me I'd like to read about it.
 
#2 ·
I don't use one either. At best, I think its useless. In fact, for me, it tends to deaden the feel for the ball, which I don't like.

Most players who get tennis elbow have a problem with their strokes, and a little rubber thingy ain't going to fix it.

I have been playing with natural gut string for over a year now, and I think it has helped my game a lot. Gut gives you better feel and control. And it will help people with tennis elbow problems because gut has more resiliency than any synthetic string on impact with a tennis ball. Tennis-warehouse.com has a good article about natural gut.
 
#10 ·
it will depend on the string you use and how high your tension is when you have your racket strung

a vibration dampener is nothing to do with weight it is to do with science becuase the absorbs the vibrations and it works wether you prefer it or not

they do you not incourage injuries or stop you getting injured totally but they can help
 
#11 ·
I play with a dampener, but I take it more like a fashion stuff (I mean I play with these Wilson Bowl of Fun dampeners that have shapes of smileys, hearts etc. - yeah, girlish). When I don't have it on, I'm able to play without it, of course. But I feel the difference. I think it's because I'm used to it. So I think if you don't use it and suddenly you put it on, you won't feel comfy and it will distract your concentration.
 
#13 ·
Exactly right, the only thing they are doing is changing the high frequency string vibrations which results in a noise dampening, but I'm also pretty convinced they don't reduce the amont of vibrations which reach your arm.
 
#17 ·
ok string a racket with poly at a high tension and then hit with it with no vibration dampener, then put a small logo one i.e. babolat 'o' wilson 'w' etc and then use a long worm and you will def see a difference.

the research i saw was from a scientific company about 5 years ago but cant remember it

they were also talking about string tensions and that was interesteing cos they were saying a high tension gives you more control and the lower the tension doesnt give you more powerful jus a higher projection for the ball off the racket if that makes sense
 
#18 ·
ok string a racket with poly at a high tension and then hit with it with no vibration dampener, then put a small logo one i.e. babolat 'o' wilson 'w' etc and then use a long worm and you will def see a difference.
i'm not saying there is no difference, i'm saying that there is no significant difference.

of course you will feel some difference with poly, its a stiff string that transmits more vibrations. with multifilament strings there will be very little difference.

they were also talking about string tensions and that was interesteing cos they were saying a high tension gives you more control and the lower the tension doesnt give you more powerful jus a higher projection for the ball off the racket if that makes sense
that is correct
 
#20 ·
ok it is not my research

but take it to an extreme if you use poly at a high tension it creates more vibrations than a soft multifilament and if you use a multi there is a good cchance you will not need a vibration dampener

all i said was try it

it is no different to the systems the racket manufacturers work and they would not do it unless they could prove it works it would be illegal and with brnads like babolat and wilson whi quote figures on tehir products i would listen

jazar you work in wigmore so when some asks you i get a lot of vibrations - your response is........

glenn please enighten me in your physics
 
#23 ·
jazar you work in wigmore so when some asks you i get a lot of vibrations - your response is........
JOURNAL OF SPORTS SCIENCES
Volume 22, Issue 11-12, Pages 1041-1052, Published: 2004

By F.X. Li, D. Fewtrell and M Jenkins

In this study, we examined the effect of string vibration damping devices on reducing racket frame vibration transfer to the forearm. Twenty participants volunteered to hold a tennis racket stationary in a forehand and backhand stroking position while tennis balls were fired at 20 m (.) s(-1) towards two impact locations, the node of vibration and the dead spot. A three-way analysis of variance with repeated measures on damping condition, impact location and stroke condition was performed on the data. The resonant frequency of the hand-held racket was found to be similar to 120 Hz. No significant differences in amplitude of vibration at the resonant frequency were found for the wrist or the elbow when damped and non-damped impacts were compared. Impacts at the dead spot produced greater amplitudes of vibration (P < 0.01) but no interaction between impact location and string dampers was evident. The string dampers had no effect on the grip force used or the muscle electrical activity in the forearm after impact. In conclusion, we found that string dampers do not reduce the amount of racket frame vibration received at the forearm. We suggest that string dampers remain a popular accessory among tennis players because of their acoustic effects and psychological support rather than any mechanical advantage.

JOURNAL OF SPORTS SCIENCES
Volume 17, Issue 5, Pages 379-385, Published: MAY 1999

By C.L. Stroede, L. Noble and H.S. Walker

In this study, we evaluated the effect of the use of tennis racket string vibration dampers on racket handle vibrations, and perceptions of hand and arm discomfort experienced by tennis players owing to stationary racket impacts. Twenty tennis players (10 males, 10 females) aged 18-29 years volunteered for the study. Two different racket models were impacted at the geometric centre of the racket face and 100 mm distal to the centre both with and without string vibration dampers in place. The participants could neither see nor hear the impacts, and they indicated their discomfort immediately after each impact using a visual analogue scale. An analysis of variance (2 x 2 x 2 factorial) was performed on the scaled discomfort ratings with the factors damping condition, racket type and impact location. No significant differences in discomfort ratings between damped and undamped impacts or between the two racket types were found. Also, central impacts were found to be more comfortable than impacts 100 mm distal to the centre (P < 0.05). There were no significant interaction effects. Vibration traces from an accelerometer mounted on the racket handle revealed that string vibration dampers quickly absorbed high-frequency string vibration without attenuating the lower-frequency frame vibration. In conclusion, we found no evidence to support the contention that string vibration dampers reduce hand and arm impact discomfort.

these two studies prove what glenn and i have been saying throughout this thread. anyone who wishes to disagree with this scientific evidence is more than welcome to.

so gaz, what i tell customers is that vibration dampeners are not effective. if they experience excessive vibrations i recommend they change the string or racket they use.
 
#21 ·
Simple:

A medium tennis ball weighs 56 grams (from ITF's website). A racket weighs like 330 grams. I doubt a anti-vibe weighs more than 5 grams.

So here it goes.

Let's take a 200 kph serve, for instance. It's an extreme of it all, but it should work. It will reach the opponent's racket at about 100 kph speed, maybe less.

The ball will reach the racket with a kinetic energy of 21.61J.

Considering an elastic collision and everything. (I'll spare you my calculations here, but it involves conservation of kinetic energy and momentum).

You'll end up with two speeds. The speed of the ball and the speed the racket would have if you weren't holding it. Now I used that speed to calculate the energy you'd have to put into it to keep the racket still. Mind you this is very simple but it will show you clearly.

Without the anti-vibe, E = 10.72 Joules
With the anti-vibe, E = 10.61 Joules

That means that the anti-vibe only absorbed 0.11 Joules of energy. 1.026% of the initial energy.

If you want my calculations I can show you.

Two things:
1- I'm using a very simple model, I know.
2- The vibrations are caused by the impact. They're a manifestation of the dissipation of energy throughout the racket's body. That's something I presume you understand mate. Simple physics.

I hope this is very clear. :)
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top