I am a beginner in the sport, Just wnna know why most world champs use Yonex, Is it because Yonex is that Very good? or just because they are paid to use it? or They dont allow diff brands when Yonex sponsors a tournament? What does Chen Hong use, how many lbs and what kind of strings? Anybody pls....

In my own opinions, I just think Yonex has more varieties with good reputations. It's like, when you buy cars, and you buy BMWs just because you know you can't go wrong.

Also, you can always find a racket suits your style of play since Yonex has so many rackets.

Yonex built their reputation over the years by making high quality products and earning the respect of the badminton community. They didn't start out as #1 but have become #1 by improving their products while helping to grow the sport. They certainly have allot of raquets to chose from and pay players to use them but many times in this form we have heard world class players using Yonex because they want to yet they're not paid to and in some players use Yonex while under contract to other companies. Yonex just makes good stuff and puts allot back into the sport.

Yonex has been on the market for many years already. They have proven that they has been the leader in badminton market. They have their own r&d and has contributed alot into badminton interms of education, tournaments etc.

Japan is renowned for being effiecient in R&D and they are also hardworking coming up with many creative ideas.

It appeals to a lot of people.

To the people who want the newest and coolest
To the people who want the most hi-tech gear to give them an edge
To the people who like cool colors
To the people who want to make a sound investment

I like the BMW comparison. It maynot be the best value for money but you know you cant go wrong with it.

I myself am slow and weak so I will take any technological advantage I can afford =)

Also, I know that if I get a Yonex racket, it was designed scientifically with a purpose in mind, whereas if I get a clonex racket I might just be getting a racket that was designed a certain way because it was made to LOOK like a Yonex and not because it was designed to ACT like one.

Originally posted by TRFred
Is it because Yonex is that Very good? or just because they are paid to use it?

1. Yonex does make good rackets, the only draw back is the higher price.

2. Most pros are under contract. Once u r "locked", u have to use their products in major events. Therefore pros using other brands such as Gosen, Victor, Winex, etc, but Yonex's # is surely huge.

3. Once under contract, the price factor won't be important for pros, since they get their equipment / gears for free.

Both. because yonex paid or them to use it and yonex produce very good quality products. The only bad thing about yonex racquets is they're too expensive. Their mid range racquets cost as much as high end racquets of other brands.

'high end' is a relative term.
have you ridden on a 'high end' Kia suv versus a low end lexus suv?

Now i see. Maybe i'll get a Yonex when i got the budget, tnx guys, Keep on smashing!!!! Lineman : Out!!.

if you still uncertain, best is to try out some rackets (both yonex and non yonex) from players in your club(s). I'm sure most people will let you hit the shuttles around. (non game)

haha, using the standard pronounciation on "WHY Yonex?", I thought this thread was about Yonex ruining your life or something.. :D

Why yonex is relatively expensive. Because of advertising they pay. They give the gears to the pros for free , pay them for endorsement fee etc. Furthermore every big tournaments Yonex have to bid for it to be the host of the events. They pay alot for the events , also they provide shuttles. All is advertising cost. We the consumer pay for it , that is why yonex is more expensive than other rackets.

Plainly and simply YONEX has the $$ POWER to sponsor, advertise, recruit players and it's simply affecting us psychologically...

From what I've been told...

Most of the world champs use Yonex, do so because they are fully sponsored. At the top sponsorship level get a free, seemingly endless supply, of everything and anything that is Yonex badminton (shoes, clothes, racquets, grips, strings, bags, grip powder, you name it). As some people have already mentioned, they are also paid for endorsements. These players must use only Yonex products all the time, and nothing else, as it is outlined in their sponsorship contracts. Whether or not Yonex sponsors a particular tournament has nothing to do with a players' individual contract, except in some special cases where a team tournament is sponsored by Yonex and the tournament contract states that all teams must wear Yonex team clothing. Also, the top level Yonex sponsorship contracts also force players to use Yonex top of the line racquets. These players have no choice but to use only the top models of racquets from the various Yonex racquet lines even if they preferred a bottom of the line racquet. However, players with lower level sponsorship contracts are allowed to use whatever racquet they wish since they are low profile players and the world isn't watching them. Does Yonex make very good equipment? Yes, they do, but so does every major badminton equipment company out there today. Every company out there makes their share of crap to great equipment, including Yonex.

Now that you know why so many top pros use Yonex, you'll hopefully understand that it doesn't mean you have to use Yonex in order to be a good player. The club I, and some other BF.com members here play at, is probably the largest badminton club in terms of membership, in Vancouver, Canada, and the majority of the players certainly use Yonex racquets. However, if you look at just the best players in the club, I would say that there is a much wider variety of brands being represented with Yonex just being one of them. So use whatever works for you, and what you can afford. Never, ever, go by what someone else is using just because they're a good player. All good players can make almost any racquet work for them to some degree of success, regardless of the brand/price, as long as it is characteristically similar to their optimal personal preferences.

As far as Chen Hong goes, I don't know his exact equipment details, but I can pretty much guarantee you that he uses one of the top of the line Yonex racquets. As for the string tension and which strings he prefers, I can also pretty much guarantee that he uses an extremely high string tension (probably something like 30-33lbs.). Will the same racquet work for you? Maybe it will, maybe it won't. Although if you're totally new to the sport, any low-end racquet will also work for you until you eventually learn what racquet characteristics you prefer. Will that same high string tension work for you? Absolutely not. Generally, only professionals use racquet tensions that high. They are the only ones truly skilled enough to take advantage of such high tensions, and are the only ones that can afford to constantly replace snapped strings and broken racquets (typical disadvantages of using high string tensions) because their sponsorship replaces them all for free. A string tension between 18-20lbs will do you just fine, as will any durable string.


Originally posted by TRFred
I am a beginner in the sport, Just wnna know why most world champs use Yonex, Is it because Yonex is that Very good? or just because they are paid to use it? or They dont allow diff brands when Yonex sponsors a tournament? What does Chen Hong use, how many lbs and what kind of strings? Anybody pls....

timeless, Amen brother. very well said!! :)

Chen Hong uses the AT-700 (well obviously Yonex wouldn't get him to use a lesser racket like the Iso 63). Apparently, he likes the stiffness of the shaft and he finds that it suits his style of play perfectly. Whether these are his own words or not I do not know =\

Also, the top level Yonex sponsorship contracts also force players to use Yonex top of the line racquets. These players have no choice but to use only the top models of racquets from the various Yonex racquet lines even if they preferred a bottom of the line racquet.

timeless, some stuffs u said is true but i like to clarify some more on what you have said. Yonex, as well as other equips makers, don't really force them to use certain model of equips as long as it's yonex (i'll use yonex here as an example). Naturally, the pros lean toward the highend models because they have higher performance. Yonex get inputs from pros before selecting certain prototype go into commercial production. Why would sponsored pros don't uses what they have given input into the design? Of course they uses mp100, 99 & AT700, shb89, etc.. Also, i dont think pros minded if they do 'force' to use certain high end model. Pros would have concern if they were force to low end model i bet. Say if i'm sponsored by Mercedes benz, i wouldn't be offended if i'm 'forced' to drive their AMG or s600 during off track.

Players: Pros don't choose their career because they get free equips. Their endorsement, fee, winning prizes, (ie $$) worth much more than free rackets or shoes. It's part of their business, just like anybody getting free or discounted stuffs from their companies. (i worked for a brewery b4, i got free beers to take home, or employee discount from the store u work for). I didnt chose the job based on what freebies i would get.

Lastly, beginner should understand that high end rackets don't help you at all, actually it may impair your performance. Heavy head and stiff shaft are not beginner features u want, even if u can afford it. I dont think yonex actively market high end rackets to beginner either. I think yonex catalogs show that more than 50% of their product line are mid and low end rackets. We fanatics here talk and refer to high end equips alot so it's perceived that everyone is using mp100/99 and at700.

You say pros can use any rackets with grace and agility, i totally agreed BUT in real life performance, ie tournament where their career and $$ is on the line, any advantage u have over your opponents is VERY DESIRABLE. At pros level, where they train and be the best as they could, most have similar skills and playing ability. They all want any edge to beat their opponents. If his Yonex XX with certain string at certain tension will give them an average of say 2% better in shuttle control and 3% better in smashing speed, they will demand that combination. $$, national pride, and being on the national team are at stake here. The economic choice of which equips to use is meaningless here.

All of my information regarding professional sponsorship was passed to me first hand from a former international player sponsored by Yonex. This player actually chose to use low/mid-level Yonex racquets because they suited him the best, and his contract did not require that he use only the top models. Your opinions seem to be based off today's racquet lines with all of the modern gimmicks/features. Racquet companies are putting all the bells and whistles on the top end racquets and less gimmicky features on the rest. There are only a few select pros that are on the Yonex advisory staff... not all of them. The top players of previous years didn't have as advanced racquet technology of today's pros. Their competitors would still not have beaten them if they had today's racquets.

Many pros turn to previous racquet models that they prefer over new cutting edge designs after they drop out of the lime-light (semi-retirement). Not all professionals want to change racquet models every year or two, discarding their favorite racquets that they spent a lot of time adapting to. The best players don't believe any kind of new racquet technology will increase their success. As tough as the competition is at the top, the outcome of any match/tournament relies directly on factors such as skill, training/preparation efforts, God-given talent, and physical, mental, and emotional condition. Not on which technologies are in their racquets. To use your example, a professional might be willing to embrace new racquets for a 3% faster smash, but they would not do so believing it to be a deciding factor of their career, tournament, or match. A smash wouldn't be harder to return because of a slight speed increase. Smashes would be harder to return if you could reach the shuttle quicker, increase the accuracy or angle, etc. Most are factors that have don't have a lot to do with the racquet. At the professional level, smashes are usually returned/not based on the setup of the smash, and whether the defender was properly prepared, and not as much on how fast the shuttle was travelling. All competitors already hit very hard at that level of play. Pros want increased control, which is why they use high string tensions, and most importantly, practise, practise, practise.

As for the pros choosing their careers because of the free stuff they get? I made no such statement. Nor did I ever say that economy is a factor in what the pros use. Please do not twist my words around. But while we're on the subject, the pros do indeed choose their sponsorship based on what the sponsor is willing to provide for them. Similar to the benefits that many companies use to entice good employees.

timeless, u must misread my post, i didnt doubted your last post, i was just adding to it.

Of course tournament success is based on good skills and technique. However, when all these parameters are equally matched, the desire to have an upper edge is very strong, be it equips or drugs. Performance enhancement drugs are illegal, equips aren't. Of course there will alway be some pros who like to use older model of equips.
Many pros turn to previous racquet models that they prefer over new cutting edge designs after they drop out of the lime-light (semi-retirement).
One reason might also be because they are no longer sponsored, and or don't need the small incremental performance benefits of the latest equips. Also, THERE IS ALWAY THE TRADE OFF USING WHAT YOU KNOW VERSUS SOMETHING NEW AND MABYE BETTER BUT NOT ACUSTOM TO IT. I believe that is the main reason. For example, to keep using bg65 that a player train with since his/her teen or switch to a new better string for the coming big tournaments? Some will resist change like peter gade with slim10 and some not, mostly double players.

To use your example, a professional might be willing to embrace new racquets for a 3% faster smash, but they would not do so believing it to be a deciding factor of their career, tournament, or match. A smash wouldn't be harder to return because of a slight speed increase. Smashes would be harder to return if you could reach the shuttle quicker, increase the accuracy or angle, etc. Most are factors that have don't have a lot to do with the racquet. At the professional level, smashes are usually returned/not based on the setup of the smash, and whether the defender was properly prepared, and not as much on how fast the shuttle was travelling. All competitors already hit very hard at that level of play. Pros want increased control, which is why they use high string tensions, and most importantly, practise, practise, practise.
It is true but from the law of averages, over the 3 to 5 days of tournament, assuming same angle of shot, same everything except the shuttle is 5 mph faster, chances are that this small incremental in speed will yield few extra score points. For example, applying your logic, if a skillful driver drives carefully, travelling 40 mph should have the same accident rate as if he was driving 30 or 20 mph as long as he is careful all the time. We are all human, we can't hit perfect shots all the times, EVEN pros. BRL and insurance companies will support me on this, driving incrementally faster will result in incrementally more accident, a direct correlation. Therefore, incrementally faster shuttles over time will yield incrementally more points, not much but in close games, you only need 1 point to win the game.

As for the pros choosing their careers because of the free stuff they get? I made no such statement. Nor did I ever say that economy is a factor in what the pros use. Please do not twist my words around.

I did not twist your word since you have said it yourself that you have not ever say that..... I can't twist on words that you have not said. I was adding a comment on my own account. Surely i hope this is allowed in a discussion. Beside, you were just reiterating what i have said, that a player chooses his/her and sponsor based on $$ and other career advancement ladder (transportation to and from tournaments) BUT i am adding that it's not based on trinkets like rackets, shoes, bag, strings.

Relax...everyone have their own opinion. Anyway both your informations helps alot. :)

I am relax.

:cool: er

Btw, think of all mishit shots as accidents;)

Based on your replies, it's clear that you and I aren't seeing eye to eye on this. Not because we don't agree on things, but because we don't seem to be comprehending eachothers ideas very accurately. We're looking at the same picture but from totally different perspectives. So I'm not going to continue with this since it's going nowhere. Perhaps we'll have better luck in person the next time you're in town for a BF.com meeting. :cool:

hey, no problem. You know what u know and same goes for me. No hard feeling taken. :)

Well Yonex still the best :)

well, best policy is still finding the lowest cost equips that work for you. If u find something better, just ask yourself is it worth upgrading. This applies to most tangible materials.

Hey guys thanks for your views, you've help me on this, your discussions are helpful, right now im using a Talbot Torro 2000, tension is at 20lbs, and all i need is to practice,practice and practice as you guys said, expensive rackets will not help me, so if i get better maybe thats the time to buy. Thanks and keep smashing.!! Lineman: Out again!

An update for this thread. It's now 2004.

From my previous post Inter-School Competition (http://www.badmintonforum.com/vb/showthread.php?p=138145#post138145) of the Inter-School Competition held at the city stadium two weeks ago, I can tell of an observation.

Two lil' but fabulous duo the size of 10-year olds (but should be 12, playing in U-15) uses clonex racquets for their matches against earlier round opponents, and this can be confirmed by the caps - a lot of the non-Yonex racquets have orange, light blue, red caps.

But when going up against powerful foes, both switched to Yonexes. They eventually lost, but not without a rubber set and a hard fight to boot.

So, why Yonex?

The timeless advice of racquet vs technique will tell you that superior technique will rule the day compared to racquet, but when going up against foes of similar capabilities and power, or better, one tend to try to get the best possible arsenal to battle.

The kids were awesome players, perhaps amongst the top 1% of the creme de la creme, playing superb badminton with very, very solid fundamentals and technique.

Yet, they revert to Yonex against major foes.
Truly, this must be an endorsement that Yonex racquets are a trusted brand to deliver when it really matters.

An update for this thread. It's now 2004.

Yet, they revert to Yonex against major foes.
Truly, this must be an endorsement that Yonex racquets are a trusted brand to deliver when it really matters.
A quick face saving act by Yonex by giving these kids their rackets. A win by Clonex is absolutely unacceptable :D :D :D

An update for this thread. It's now 2004.

From my previous post Inter-School Competition (http://www.badmintonforum.com/vb/showthread.php?p=138145#post138145) of the Inter-School Competition held at the city stadium two weeks ago, I can tell of an observation.

Two lil' but fabulous duo the size of 10-year olds (but should be 12, playing in U-15) uses clonex racquets for their matches against earlier round opponents, and this can be confirmed by the caps - a lot of the non-Yonex racquets have orange, light blue, red caps.

But when going up against powerful foes, both switched to Yonexes. They eventually lost, but not without a rubber set and a hard fight to boot.

So, why Yonex?

The timeless advice of racquet vs technique will tell you that superior technique will rule the day compared to racquet, but when going up against foes of similar capabilities and power, or better, one tend to try to get the best possible arsenal to battle.

The kids were awesome players, perhaps amongst the top 1% of the creme de la creme, playing superb badminton with very, very solid fundamentals and technique.

Yet, they revert to Yonex against major foes.
Truly, this must be an endorsement that Yonex racquets are a trusted brand to deliver when it really matters.

I agree that there might be great possibility ur assumptions are right. However, is that possible:

1. Their contract only require them to promote yonex in certain standard contest. i.e. later round in high lvl competition

2. Different rackets have difference features. Sometimes, players do use different rackets against opponents with different playing style. Can't say which opponent (reflect to racket) is better or worse, but just different.

#1 problem with yonex is that they dont have a huge MALL full of yonex stuff in every major city.
shipping is costly

#1 problem with yonex is that they dont have a huge MALL full of yonex stuff in every major city.
shipping is costly

Well, which brand does have such a MALL? And why it's necessary at the 1st place??? :confused: :rolleyes:

You are supposed to get rackets from retailers -.-

Yonex has been on the market for many years already. They have proven that they has been the leader in badminton market. They have their own r&d and has contributed alot into badminton interms of education, tournaments etc.

There has to be more in the answer to this question. The BMW comparison doesn't work for me. Not everyone who has the money for a BMW buys one. Many buy Lexus, Audi, Mercedes, etc. On the other hand, everyone buys Yonex. I'm hyperbolizing, of course, but when it comes to pros, this is basically the case. Only a handful of pros use something other than Yonex.

It can't be a demand thing. There must be a supply side reason. Sure, Yonex gives these racquets to the pros for free and sinks a lot of money into sponsoring events but why only Yonex? Adidas doesn't sponsor every single football team. Puma, Nike, Umbro, and Lotto all have their fair share. So how is the Yonex badminton case different?

I think Ants is the closest. They've been in it for a long time. True, they've been making tennis racquets for almost as long (and possibly longer than HEad or Babolat) and don't dominate that market. So the badminton market must just be a long way from reaching maturity. After all, it used to look like Adidas sponsored everyone in football. To use another example, until about 10 years ago, every single speed skater used exactly the same brand and model of skates: Viking Marathon. Then short track went Olympic and inline-skating came into fashion and the market mushroomed.

What is strange is that Yonex has this position in a global market. Ants's other point about the R&D is correct but the fact that they put a lot of thought into badminton when they researched and advertised may be what set them apart from the other tennis racquet makers. They started in badminton in '61 and went into tennis in '69. Wilson, Dunlop, Donnay, Pro Kennex, Black Knight, Slazenger, and others all made badminton racquets, too, but they didn't focus on them to the same degree. Probably not a coincidence that of those racquet companies only Yonex was an Asian company and badminton was more popular in Asia than tennis and Asia had more badminton players than the homes of those other companies.

The major competitors with Yonex these days come from what I believe are younger companies like Victor and Gosen. They don't seem to be rich enough to sponsor yet. The real mystery is Carlton. I'm sure that company is older than Yonex (their website's been down for a year so I can't tell for sure) but they haven't got anything close to Yonex's market share. Perhaps they weren't as smart in terms of sponsorships, marketing, or R&D. Perhaps not being an Asian company hurt them in some way or perhaps not being in Asia, they didn't see the potential payback on sponsorship money that Yonex did. I don't know. Now Carlton sponsors English players and Black Knight, an American company, sponsors players close to home (the Canadian team). Looking at this pattern, I once assumed Gosen was a Malaysian company but even the Malaysians have all switched to Yonex now.

This all means that either badminton is close to a natural monopoly or Yonex's competitors are so inept that they've let Yonex have a ridiculous market share in what is large enough to support more diversity. It doesn't mean, however, that you can't get a better racquet, or at any rate one more suited to you, from one of the other companies because they do have the money to research, design and build great racquets even if they can't afford to hang their logos on international athletes and competitions.

One thing I'd like to know, though, is whether Yonex's share of tournament and athlete sponsorship is out of step with their share of the retail market. Do you think people buy their products at the same rate at which Yonex gives them away to pros and tournament hosts?

Good post Event :)

Yonex are monopolising badminton. You only have to look at the sponsored tournaments such as All England, where other companies are not allowed to sell their products, otherise they withdraw their sponsorship.

I highly suspect them of price fixing too, but I do not want to say anything at this stage.

Yonex is keeping badminton alive, but at the same time, not allowing the sport to grow and diversify. Just look at the paltry prizes.

I think it is in the 'general interest' an unwritten rule for a sponsored player to promote the latest equipment. However it is essential for them to at least bear their sponsor's logo and equipment, at visible levels of competition (esp towards later stages when more people are watching).

I think there is a different attitude between Asian (especially Chinese) and Western players. Chinese and Asian players 'appear' to live and sleep in their Yonex gear :) even during informal occasions. Western players seem to either have greater freedom/leniency or flexibility to choose what to wear outside of games. I have seen English players who are sponsored by Carlton and Hi-tec, wearing and playing with Yonex on the odd occasion, both on and off court. Try to imagine Chen Hong in Forza shirt and playing with Babolat!

Each player I believe is given a certain amount of racquets per season, as specified on their contract. I do not believe they are giving away racquets at the same rate as selling them. I think they must keep the sponsorships at a constant level, ie. offer new sponsorships sparingly.

Go and take a look at Yonex's turnover and profits report, it's quite an interesting read.







There has to be more in the answer to this question. The BMW comparison doesn't work for me. Not everyone who has the money for a BMW buys one. Many buy Lexus, Audi, Mercedes, etc. On the other hand, everyone buys Yonex. I'm hyperbolizing, of course, but when it comes to pros, this is basically the case. Only a handful of pros use something other than Yonex.

It can't be a demand thing. There must be a supply side reason. Sure, Yonex gives these racquets to the pros for free and sinks a lot of money into sponsoring events but why only Yonex? Adidas doesn't sponsor every single football team. Puma, Nike, Umbro, and Lotto all have their fair share. So how is the Yonex badminton case different?

I think Ants is the closest. They've been in it for a long time. True, they've been making tennis racquets for almost as long (and possibly longer than HEad or Babolat) and don't dominate that market. So the badminton market must just be a long way from reaching maturity. After all, it used to look like Adidas sponsored everyone in football. To use another example, until about 10 years ago, every single speed skater used exactly the same brand and model of skates: Viking Marathon. Then short track went Olympic and inline-skating came into fashion and the market mushroomed.

What is strange is that Yonex has this position in a global market. Ants's other point about the R&D is correct but the fact that they put a lot of thought into badminton when they researched and advertised may be what set them apart from the other tennis racquet makers. They started in badminton in '61 and went into tennis in '69. Wilson, Dunlop, Donnay, Pro Kennex, Black Knight, Slazenger, and others all made badminton racquets, too, but they didn't focus on them to the same degree. Probably not a coincidence that of those racquet companies only Yonex was an Asian company and badminton was more popular in Asia than tennis and Asia had more badminton players than the homes of those other companies.

The major competitors with Yonex these days come from what I believe are younger companies like Victor and Gosen. They don't seem to be rich enough to sponsor yet. The real mystery is Carlton. I'm sure that company is older than Yonex (their website's been down for a year so I can't tell for sure) but they haven't got anything close to Yonex's market share. Perhaps they weren't as smart in terms of sponsorships, marketing, or R&D. Perhaps not being an Asian company hurt them in some way or perhaps not being in Asia, they didn't see the potential payback on sponsorship money that Yonex did. I don't know. Now Carlton sponsors English players and Black Knight, an American company, sponsors players close to home (the Canadian team). Looking at this pattern, I once assumed Gosen was a Malaysian company but even the Malaysians have all switched to Yonex now.

This all means that either badminton is close to a natural monopoly or Yonex's competitors are so inept that they've let Yonex have a ridiculous market share in what is large enough to support more diversity. It doesn't mean, however, that you can't get a better racquet, or at any rate one more suited to you, from one of the other companies because they do have the money to research, design and build great racquets even if they can't afford to hang their logos on international athletes and competitions.

One thing I'd like to know, though, is whether Yonex's share of tournament and athlete sponsorship is out of step with their share of the retail market. Do you think people buy their products at the same rate at which Yonex gives them away to pros and tournament hosts?

Each player I believe is given a certain amount of racquets per season, as specified on their contract. I do not believe they are giving away racquets at the same rate as selling them. I think they must keep the sponsorships at a constant level, ie. offer new sponsorships sparingly.

Go and take a look at Yonex's turnover and profits report, it's quite an interesting read.

My wording was terrible. What I meant was that I wondered whether their share of the retail market were the same as their share of athlete and tournament sponsorships. They seem to sponsor 90% of top pros and tournaments (possibly a slight exaggeration). Do they own a similar percentage of the retail market?

Also, the top level Yonex sponsorship contracts also force players to use Yonex top of the line racquets. These players have no choice but to use only the top models of racquets from the various Yonex racquet lines even if they preferred a bottom of the line racquet.
(truncated)
Are players getting "tagged" as walking billboards too?? I'm appaled not to see at least 5 or 6 logos!

His outfit reminds me more of the korean squad than the Malaysian squad. :D

His outfit reminds me more of the korean squad than the Malaysian squad. :D
But I can't immagine Ha with a Yonex logo on his right hand.

thats the new upcoming product of 2k6

the nanoTatoo technologies by Yonex, do it on your racket hand
and nano paint will draw power from you body and transfer it
to your racket giving a 15% more smashing power.

thats the new upcoming product of 2k6

the nanoTatoo technologies by Yonex, do it on your racket hand
and nano paint will draw power from you body and transfer it
to your racket giving a 15% more smashing power.
I just hope thay have this product in "easy to apply - self application" packs. I wouldn't want to travel especially to a recognised Yonex rep just for this procedure. Do you think will be waranteed for at least a year?

Yonex sucks imo

because they are cool :) They have nice designs :)

Yonex sucks imo
I dun agree :) Yonex ownt :)

thats the new upcoming product of 2k6

the nanoTatoo technologies by Yonex, do it on your racket hand
and nano paint will draw power from you body and transfer it
to your racket giving a 15% more smashing power.

I always wonder how they came up with the calcualation. Like 15% more power than the wooden racket or the steel one???? :D

and yeah, Yonex is good, and they overpriced for the reason that they have so many sponsored player. And now, all LD, TH, BCL and the many many are no longer sponsored by me. :p