Hi everyone,

newcomer to the boards and really enjoy the discussion around here. Just so that folks know where I come from, I used to play High School/Varsity level of competition, so you could qualify me as "club" player. I stopped playing for a while and now am ready to pick up the game again.

I have a few questions regarding new racket technology : are they worth it? Let me explain. I used to play with a cab8 and cab16, they were decent back then back then but got a bit "heavy" and felt that they lacked power. Does Muscle power, Titanium mesh, HMG confer more power ie more distance/speed with less effort? My mechanic and footwork are pretty sound.

If any tennis player can relate, the jump from a "conventionnal" frame to a "wide-body" frame was an insane jump in power vs effort when it came out in the '90. I held my conventionnal frame for a while, loving the control I could put into it, but then switched for the outright power coming from the widebody. Never looked back after the switch. Is there any "improvement" worth it or should I stick with a good (and less expensive!) carbonex? I am also aware that certain types of players stick with older technology because they are very used to it and don't want to switch or can extract the most of those rackets (very skilled). Example are Pete Sampras with non-widebody way back, some international badminton players going with cab20.

Short version

1) MP / Ti mesh / HMG or newer technology for more "easy" power?

thanks for the input

P.S.: I know there is probably not a consensus on this, but, taking the widebody example for tennis, no one can deny the power advantage of the widebody frames over the older "fat" ones. I am looking for similar concrete badminton improvements.

There's only one way to decide whether you like a racket: try playing with it.

I believe that almost all the technology claims of racket manufacturers are rubbish. They are targeted at gullible players with relatively little experience. According to manufacturers, EVERY racket is a "power racket". Why? Because every badly-informed, equipment-obsessed player considers himself a "power player". There's something macho about it.

I currently use a Karakal SL-70, which is the lightest badminton racket in the world. As the knowledgeable people on these forums know, a very light racket is NOT a racket for the "power player". An extremely light racket has excellent maneuverability but cannot produce as much power as a heavier racket.

But how is this racket sold? Central Sports describes it as "The lightest frame in the world designed for pure power." Rubbish! It's not designed for power, it's designed for maneuverability and quick recovery! But that's the way to sell rackets - pander to the stupid people who make up the majority of the market. Stupid people who think that their macho-sounding equipment makes them a better player.

The same reasoning applies to all these fancy new technologies. As long as they have an impressive-sounding name - and you don't get much more impressive than "Muscle Power" or "Ultimum Titanium" - they will sell well. This makes it very difficult for the genuine connoisseur to decide between rackets, because he cannot use Yonex's (or anyone else's) description as a guide.

Don't get me wrong - I think that many of these rackets are superb. It's just that I think the technologies are a chimera, used to suck gullible tech-fanatics into spending more money.

The racket that I would like, if I could afford it, is a Yonex MP99. But I don't care about it's titanium mesh or isometric head or whatever - I just love the feel of the racket. Don't be manipulated by marketing - make your own judgements by trying out the rackets.

For me, new technologies just means that you can string for higher tension, and better materials just "sometimes" make the racket stronger and reduce the weight to save up your strength.

Other than those, I don't see anything else on the new techs. :)

Mainly, I think the new tech just saves the weight of the racket so that most of today's rackets are within 100g, instead of the old ones which weight more than 200 or so (or even 300+).....

Gollum,

you are preaching to the converted, "new" doesn't always mean "better" and yes I would love to try out rackets... but I can't find any places around Montreal that will let you demos the rackets nor do I have the bank account to tryout various rackets, hence this post. I was mostly wondering if there was a breakthrough in racket technology while I was away. I guess that answer is no :) .

Bluejeff,

thanks for the honest heads up. From the review here, I'll keep on looking for cab20/30MS or the MP99 (pricey tho :( )

thanks a bunch

I have been playing badminton from the mid 50s and I have had my fair share of racquets of different eras. Sure, there were a lot of marketing bull with each new generation of racquets, but through all these, all I can say is you fellows don't know how blessed you are to be fortunate to play with today's really superb racquets.
The only fool-proof way of choosing a racquet suitable for your needs is to borrow racquets from friends and try them out before buying. There are people who are the first to get hold of new top of the lone racquets as soon as they are released. That is when you should try out their racquets. I am sure they won't object, especially if they are very pleased with their new toy and would not mind letting you try it out. This is the way I progress from one racquet generation to another. It also saves you a lot of money down the drain.

It worth it as long as:

1-I like it
2-Help me be more confortable while playing
3-doesn't cost too much

It worth it as long as:

1-I like it
2-Help me be more confortable while playing
3-doesn't cost too much

I second that, but how do you get to 1-I like it in the first place?

New Technologies would be affected by the factors as follows:

1) Playability - at least in theory, the new technologies must work, otherwise it is hardly to attract cosumers to buy it.

2) The coporate image - more technologies, the company would be more competitive and higher image would be also obtained from public.

3) Profit Margin - higher price for added value specifications.

4) Sales figure - when the new technologies can attract the public interest, then more users buy the new rackets, sales volume and net profit would be increased.

Some technologies really works, such as steel shaft to grahite shaft, iso head shape can provide larger sweet spots.............

But would the technologies fit for everyone, I just have a question on it. Since some international players are still using Cab 9 and Cab 20. Those technologis are more than 15 years old and now is old technologies. If those new technologies can fit for everyone, I think every match only exists MP99, MP100 and At 700, but no more Cab 9, Cab 20, Ti 10. There are still 1/3 players are using oval head shape rackets and not all guys are using iso head shape racket.

In fact that the sponsorship also affects the international players trend to use lastest technology rackets.

Don't underestimate the market, which marches to only one tune-the biggest bang for the buck to the consumer. If a Yonex fake sells well for a certain price, then it has the biggest bang for the buck for such owners. If other players use the top Yonex brands, then obviously they think it is worth the extra cost. However, do you notice that players who start off with cheapies do progress up to higher grades, seldom the other way around.

Near where I live there is a shop ("PWP") that allows me to try out as many rackets as I like. I pay for them up front; if I bring them back within two weeks I get my money refunded. Last time they even put an overgrip on for free!

Unfortunately this policy is not too common. If you are lucky enough to know such a racket shop, take advantage of it! Otherwise you just have to borrow rackets from friends to try out :/

I would definitely agree that each year the rackets do improve slightly, some new innovations making bigger differences than others. But for a brand like Yonex, you certainly have to pay extra for having this year's models. I would say the rackets of today are infinitely superior to those of 10-15 years ago. I loved the Cab-20 back in the 1980s, but today, I want a muscle power frame and an isometric head shape and an extra 1 cm in the shaft, etc. I've been using the Armotec for a year now, but I still prefer the MP99 (the most popular racket on tour?). I think it will be a classic in its own way.

Longshot, it's a pity the shops around you don't demo any rackets, but if you can, defnitely try to play with a borrowed racket before you decide to buy. Rackets these days are so varied in the type of performance they are designed for. The Karakal someone mentioned earlier is a superb racket for defence and drives, but not too good for smashing. But lots of good players don't rely on smashing, while others need a head heavy racket and feel they don't get enough 'punch' from a light racket.

I love having the choice of a flexible shaft or an extra stiff shaft, iso or oval head, etc. Makes life much more interesting. :)

It shouldn't really matter if the technology works or not, if you are using an older racket in preferance of the newer generation then the technology is largely redundant.

In other words it doesn't work for you.

Not everyone likes the newer rackets ie. MP's, AT's etc.

I like my Carlton 85g better than all the rackets I have tried over the last 2-3 years and it still feels better than any of them (I have tried a lot of rackets)

I would have to comment more on this :)

For some technologies, they are really major. Such as:
Moving from steel/iron rackets -> Graphie Racket ; Weight Reduction.

Other than this, I would consider others to be really minimal, such as:
1. ISO heads instead of Oval heads, which is just a personal preference thing.
2. MP tech, which is another preference thing if you don't string to high tension you will never need the MP technology.
3. Long/Regular length rackets, still preference by people. Some people like regular and some like long.
.....etc.

So, for major improvement (such as the weight), yes, I think it is important to use something under 100g rather than a 300g racket. For others, I would not think they are necessary.

I havent read all the posts here but here is my comment.

the technology is worth it if you able to notice the improvement. If not, then it's not worth it, it's pretty simple. Also, finding a racket with stiffness and balance that fits you is more important than whether the racket is iso or oval, ti or boron, regular or long. Also, good strings makes more improvement than racket technology.

I used to have a few Dunlop Maxply racquets and a special racquet press to prevent warping. They were not exactly light-weight racquets, coming in around 150gm, and yes they were made of wood (frame). Some of you might wonder what is a racquet press? The presses were made of wood and were adjustable to take in one, two or four racquets. When not playing you put all your wooden-headed racquets in such a press to prevent warping. The presses were either of the 4 screws type or operated by a single lever. You can imagine the huge difference between today's racquets and those 150gm monsters.
Sad to say, I have lost all of my Dunlop Maxplys, Silver Greys and presses. Maybe someone can come up with a picture of some of these older equipment.

Can't say that I am an expert in rackets... although I think my story mirrors yours...

Back in the 80's when I was seriously into the game (4x a week), I was using a Cab 8 (I went through 3 of these - didn't everybody? ) and a few years later progressed to a Cab 15 and Boron Classic . Then, Cab 20's (single frame and shaft) were all the rage ...
I stopped playing for about 5-6 years and having decided to pick up the game again - went and restrung all my old rackets... the rackets felt good (like I remembered them)... Then, I took one of my buddy's rackets and started hitting some shots... it felt even better ! It wasn't an expensive one, an isometric xx I think...The racket felt sharp, manoeverable and quite powerful....

In short, I think racket technologies are better now even if it may be nothing more than better manufacuturing techniques or materials....
(I can personally attest that an MP77 is completely diff from a MP99)

Try a racket from your friend... it may change your racket !

Thanks for the input everyone,

I really agree with all of you guys. Often time "new technology" = marketing ploy = gimmick =/ But Iso head vs Oval is definitely a preference thing (myself being a Oval man).

I will try to find some folks with MP-99... added that one to my *try* list!