When Choosing A Racquet, Is Power > Everything Else?

[February]

Well, I'm talking about racquets. When it comes to a good racquet, the main points you really care about is the control and power. You want good power to be able to deliver killer smashes and good returns. You want good control so that you can make precise dropshots and have accurate shots.

But my point that I am trying to argue is, shouldn't power be the most important thing? Because its much easier to improve control by practice but you can't really make your smashes more powerful that easily...and accuracy is always improved through repetition.

I'm talking about this aspect when choosing a racquet by the way.
Can I get some professional inputs please?

[yy_ling]

skill > racket


thats all I can say

[Cheung]

But my point that I am trying to argue is, shouldn't power be the most important thing? ?The beauty of badminton as a game is that power is not the most important thing in a very subtle manner.

At amateur level, a control player can easily beat a person who has power as their primary weapon.

For me, control would be better. Better control means controlling the opponent. :)

[silentheart]

There are so many weapons in a good players arsenal. Clear, lift, net drop, back court drop, drive, smash, slice are just the foundation of a winner. Missing one, and your opponent will exploit it to death on that.
Example
1) If you can not clear, I will just keep hitting long clear to you and eventually you will hit a short shot and I will just drop or smash you and point is over.
2) If you can not lift, I will just keep dropping close to the net and sooner than later you will kill yourself.
3) If you can not do net drop, you will get tired and make a mistake.
4) If you can not do back court drop, clear and smash are the only choice. Your smash have to travel longer and will be weaker. You will get tired if you just keep clearing to back court. You really can not move you opponent around.
5) If you have problem driving, I will keep you in the mid court and drive a few shots before you pop on up and smash or you will put one into the net.
6) When you can not smash, you are always in defensive, it is harder to finish the point.
7) When you can not slice, your finishing shots is limited in the back court.

Badminton is a game of thinking, strategy, and set up shots. So what if you can smash at 300 mph. I only need to a) net drop to keep you up so you can not smash. b) drive at your shoulder so you can not smash.c) clear to the back so your smash is less effective and easier to return.

Conclusion, smash is needed but not THE shot to end the point.

[martin8768]

There are so many weapons in a good players arsenal. Clear, lift, net drop, back court drop, drive, smash, slice are just the foundation of a winner. Missing one, and your opponent will exploit it to death on that.
Example
1) If you can not clear, I will just keep hitting long clear to you and eventually you will hit a short shot and I will just drop or smash you and point is over.
2) If you can not lift, I will just keep dropping close to the net and sooner than later you will kill yourself.
3) If you can not do net drop, you will get tired and make a mistake.
4) If you can not do back court drop, clear and smash are the only choice. Your smash have to travel longer and will be weaker. You will get tired if you just keep clearing to back court. You really can not move you opponent around.
5) If you have problem driving, I will keep you in the mid court and drive a few shots before you pop on up and smash or you will put one into the net.
6) When you can not smash, you are always in defensive, it is harder to finish the point.
7) When you can not slice, your finishing shots is limited in the back court.

Badminton is a game of thinking, strategy, and set up shots. So what if you can smash at 300 mph. I only need to a) net drop to keep you up so you can not smash. b) drive at your shoulder so you can not smash.c) clear to the back so your smash is less effective and easier to return.

Conclusion, smash is needed but not THE shot to end the point.
couldn't of said it better SH, nice one

[February]

@SH: Yes, I understand you are trying to say that smash/power isn't everything in a match. I know that. You're off the point. The point I am trying to argue is that, people should rely on offensive racquets for the power it gives because it is harder to improve that aspect AND train your control/accuracy/rest of skills by practice. Instead of buying a defensive racquet for control and training your power up by practice. By all means, I do agree that power PLUS control/accuracy/other skills are definately needed in a match.

[wilfredlgf]

"Jangan angkat! You angkat, you mati!", said a prominent former world champion.

[silentheart]

Dear February,

Why do you feel it is harder to train for power than control/accuracy? I can go to any gym and work on pull up to build up my wrist strength. If I want to train at home while I watch my Anime, I can get a bar and tide a sandbag then twist it up. After I finish my bottle of 1998 Perrier Jouet, I wrap an old overgrip over the bottle neck and use to train my smash and clear swing. These exercise are great to train your grip, wrist and forearm strength. All these things can be done while you are away from badminton court to build up your smashing strength.
However, you can not practice net drop, slice, back, court drop and other you think is easier other than on the court. 1 last thing, I will make a good angled, well positioned smash at 150 mph over a 300 mph smash from a back court smash at my ab. I just want to say a racquet that suit your style is more important than a powerful racquet.

[Cheung]

@SH: Yes, I understand you are trying to say that smash/power isn't everything in a match. I know that. You're off the point. The point I am trying to argue is that, people should rely on offensive racquets for the power it gives because it is harder to improve that aspect AND train your control/accuracy/rest of skills by practice. Instead of buying a defensive racquet for control and training your power up by practice. By all means, I do agree that power PLUS control/accuracy/other skills are definately needed in a match.
It's a generalisation that I doubt the validity of. The weight distribution across the racquet is quite important as well.

[kwun]

the main thing that you are misunderstanding is that:

a racket do not generate power.

you cannot expect to have a 200mph smash once you buy a "powerful" racket. all the power ultimately comes from your technique and your muscles.

and yes, training power is just as difficult as training technique, actually, much easier than training technique.

[February]

@SH: I guess thats mostly personal preference. Mostly because it took me a long time to learn how to deliver powerful shots compared to the relatively short time it took me how to make precise dropshots. But I can't speak for the rest of the people.

@Cheung: Heh, its still just a theory :P

[Jurethatsme]

@SH: I guess thats mostly personal preference. Mostly because it took me a long time to learn how to deliver powerful shots compared to the relatively short time it took me how to make precise dropshots. But I can't speak for the rest of the people.

@Cheung: Heh, its still just a theory :P

I have to agree with February here. I can't give a professional advice since I'm somewhat a "beginning intermediate" but I can tell that most of the beginners I meet lack power! Long shots are ALWAYS problem for beginners. Therefore it seems to me too that it is harder to learn how to produce power than for example drop shots and net play. From my personal experience I can tell that I've learnt drop shots after 1 year quite good but powerful smashes are on the menu only in this, forth year.
But of course everything is up to your technique! Racquet can makes the change only when your technique is good. On the other hand I would not recomend light weight and head light racquets for beginners who lack power...

[jump17]

I would actually recommend light weight, head light rackets to beginners. Since power is generated with the correct swing/technique, light weight, head light rackets are easier to use and would therefore enable them to keep playing without getting too tired.

[Athelete1234]

The racquet that works for you will give you: Power, control, confidence, and you will play your best. The most powerful racquet which you cannot use well will make your smashes crappy, and your control and confidence plummet. What I'm saying is the racquet you like>>>>>>>>>>>>the most powerful racquet.

[cryptail]

February for some players power is the most important, for others that would be control... You can't just say in 1 sentence what is the most important or best thing to do in badminton, otherwise there wouldn't be that much topics over here ;)

[Pochacho]

I understand you.
I always think this is the reason LCW is using AT900P now :p

[Cheung]

Let me try to seperate the issues more clearly.

I entirely agree with the statement that it is easier to learn power shots than control shots.

However, that does not automatically mean racquets marketed as giving lots of power should be the primary choice for an individual.:)

[xXazn_romeoXx]

the only thing i can possibly add is the greater the ambition to get better, the greater the player, the racket is just a tool...kinda like the sword is only as deadly as its wielder...lol...but then again, you can train all you want, but without a decent tool, you're not much of a player ;)...merry christmas all!

[Badmintan]

Worked on the techinique/control first then the power will come as your muscles grow stronger thru more badminton gameplay.

The power stroke is a complex thing....actually it's not the arm that generates the power...surprisingly it's the legs and abdominal muscles...and the wrist acts as a last link to transfer the power from the legs--abdomen--to the racquet.

Do you notice elite badminton players have 'tree-trunk' thighs and calves and slim waist? Relatively their arms are not as powerful as their legs...

[Jurethatsme]

I see that a lot of comments are connecting power stroke with muscles. Muscles do not have much to do with power strokes like smash - my opinion is that the differences in speed are noticed only among experienced players - that's why they train their forearm muscles and technique. But among beginners, the technique is far more important to produce powerful shot (=high speed). And those who claim that powerful shots are easier to master, can you answer then why all beginners that I played against in my first years of badminton had (I had too) the same Achilles' heel - clear from baseline to baseline - I mean 90% of winners were won when someone manage to put nice long shuttle to backhand (or attacking clear to forehand) and then rush to the net because there was nothing else to expect than some drop shot... From my experience I also had the most difficulties against players who were fast and could clear from any postions...
If I was a trainer I would first teach how to produce power (long clears) and then net play, drop shots... And I would recommend even balanced racquets to beginners not head light because of greater relative moment. Isn't this logical?
But that's only my humble opinion... :) It would be nice to hear some experiences from badminton coaches about this.

[volcom]

I think muscles in the leg helps a lot, for the correct position to get a powerful smash. For quick bursts to get to the birdie you have to have powerful leg muscles and always moving about.
But I think correct technique is much more important than power, with correct technique you can gain a lot more power, through better timing and angled smashes. It doesn't matter if your smashes are immensely powerful if you have no degree in the smashes. With better technique you can force your opponent into weak shots which allows you to unleash smashes no matter how strong that is effective as opposed to a very powerful smash but straight into the opponents defenses that allows them to lob the birdie back further.

[silentheart]

To answer some of the questions on how to master smash and clearing, I would like to suggest the following.
1) Get a coach or trainer.
2) If not 1) Get a training video (dvd or youtube)
3) if not 1) or 2) Get a video cam and video yourself on your swing.
1/2 of the time is the technique the wrong. The other 1/2 is the footwork. Here is one problem with beginner, they are new to the sport, they don't know any one on the court. They stick and play with beginners and afread of asking advanced player for advice. That is why you take so long to master some shots. Most of the time the person in charge of your club is a more advanced player and they are friendly person. He/she will help you to work on your strokes (not the one in your brain. well, they will call emergency in case you have one). Just get there early or stay late to ask for help before everyone get into their match.
Also search through the technique forum for additional and helpful info. FYI, even the Panda the Great Smasher video tape himself to correct his swings and strokes.

[Jurethatsme]

To answer some of the questions on how to master smash and clearing, I would like to suggest the following.
1) Get a coach or trainer.
2) If not 1) Get a training video (dvd or youtube)


For me the 2. option worked! The videos on this forum and YouTube helped me a lot! I don't know any instructional video on the net that I didn't see and studied. :) (stupid sentence a? Of course I don't know something I didn't see ;)) For me, Zhao Jianhua and XiaoJie are the best!

[yippo888]

yeh me thinks control and technique over power is a obvious choice.....thats the difference between a normal player and a pro........for instance we can probs pull off the same shot as a pro occasionally, but cuz their techinique is that much more refined and that much more effecient, they will use up less energy and be more consistant in creating that shot, which is why they can do the same shot over and over agen with the same result.

so in reference to racket choice its probs better to choose a racket that ur comfortable and confident with, mayb choosing it regarding ur playing style rather than just trying to get more power?

[Badmintan]

Or is it Yonex's Armotec 900 Power > Everthing else in the market? :)

[yy_ling]

Or is it Yonex's Armotec 900 Power > Everthing else in the market? :)

then they wont be able to sell armortec 900 technique.

[Athelete1234]

Or is it Yonex's Armotec 900 Power > Everthing else in the market? :)
I'd say the Armortec 900 Power is better than some fake/clone called "Armotec 900 power" :D:D

[treilanin]

Learning the basics of any particular shot is probably a lot easier then mastering all of the subtleties of a shot. Just because you can execute a shot does not entail that the shot a good quality shot.

For instance a person who hits an overhead drop shot that cross the net a good foot above the net, uses swing mechanics that telegraph the shot obvious and the bird lands around mid court is not someone who is hitting a quality shot. Similarly, you can smash a bird that has a flat trajectory and travels straight out of the court. No matter how hard you hit that bird, it is pointless. Whether it is predominantly power or control shot, every shot requires a level of quality to be effective.

The quality of the shot is not determined by your racket, it is entirely determined by your technique and execution. As I improved in my badminton play I have found that proper foot work, positioning, placement and technique have far out weighed the need for power. In fact I have found that the power of my shots have a greater relation to my improving technique.

[martin8768]

footwork > everything else

[jhirata]

footwork > everything else
Not in some cases.. watch Shoji Sato play against Peter Gade. Shoji is known to have the 'fastest', the most 'efficient' footwork, but loses dramatically to Peter Gade and his trick-shots and technique. There are three different videos of Peter Gade using different shots to score a point against Shoji on Youtube.
I'd say that technique (Footwork+tactics) > everything else.

[exalted]

Power is easy to generate. Control, is not. Just because you feel its easy to learn control doesn't mean that's how it is. Try doing tumbling netshots and good crosscourt netshots consistently and then you'll have an idea of what control really is, nubby.

[jerby]

if you ask me, a racket doesn't have power or control...so what's the problem?

Now Balance, stiffness, length, weight...those a characteristics you could argue about...but "power" or "control", beats me :o

Now, I could try and translate "power" to heavy/headheavy/stiff/long rackets, but control, I have no clue (extra stiff perhaps..)
Also, I think you're all overlooking the concept of maneuverability, because defense is just as much a part of badminton...

[hiroisuke]

Not in some cases.. watch Shoji Sato play against Peter Gade. Shoji is known to have the 'fastest', the most 'efficient' footwork, but loses dramatically to Peter Gade and his trick-shots and technique. There are three different videos of Peter Gade using different shots to score a point against Shoji on Youtube.
I'd say that technique (Footwork+tactics) > everything else.

I agree with your last comment, but Shoji Sato definitely is NOT the fastest and most efficient. If you watch the match very closely, Shoji gets most of his points off attacking the net and pushing aggressively, which later backfires against him. He struggles to score from the back all throughout the game, simply because he's relying too heavily on the fact that Gade will drop, and when Gade starts moving him around more, Shoji starts to have problems. This is especially true during this one rally when he drops, then it seems as if Gade will drop, provoking Shoji forward, but the shot is actually a clear, and Shoji simply gives up, having gone the wrong way.


But yes, power can be defeated, I've seen too many cases where one person/pair attacks too aggressively, the other person/pair simply relies on good footwork, sharp and accurate drops and clears, and the overly aggressive side loses to the side with control and consistency.

[DivingBirdie]

it's always a problem of
commitment to power vs recovery time and stamina:D

[February]

@martin8768 (http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/member.php?u=18888)
@DivingBirdie (http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/member.php?u=13624)
@jhirata (http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/member.php?u=28097)
@hiroisuke (http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/member.php?u=20731)
Are you guys even reading the 1st page? I've already said that this thread statement refers to when choosing a racket because power is hard to build it up, I don't literally mean "Power> Everything Else." Of course you need more than just power in a real match of badminton. Read the main post next time

[jhirata]

Ops, sorry I got carried away. So a powerful racquet>everything else? Maybe, because most of the top players use powerful, high-end racquets; eg: LD(AT700), LCW(AT900P), FHF (Ti10), BCL (Ti10), PG (AT700), etc..
I think that as long as the players already have excellent technique+footwork+tactics+control, a stiff, powerful head-heavy racquet can benifit them more than any other racquet for they'll still have the same technique,etc, but more power.

[Athelete1234]

You're forgetting to incorperate swing styles, stiffnesses, responsiveness, etc in the racquet.... How do you judge a racquet on it's power? I mean, new Ti-10, AT700, NS9000X are all powerful racquets but are all completely different in terms of stiffness, balance, vibrations, responsiveness, etc.

[February]

Thanks mod, for helping me change my thread description :P


You're forgetting to incorperate swing styles, stiffnesses, responsiveness, etc in the racquet.... How do you judge a racquet on it's power? I mean, new Ti-10, AT700, NS9000X are all powerful racquets but are all completely different in terms of stiffness, balance, vibrations, responsiveness, etc.

Like you said, there are lots of different factors in an offensive racket. And also different methods of achieving power in a racket: weight, stiffness, headheaviness, etc. But I think these different factors that contribute to power depends on your personal preference: In my case, I would not like a powerful racket if that power comes from its weight (heavier than 3U) and prefer that power come from the headheaviness. But someone might like using a powerful racket that is also very heavy (2U) but dislike the headheavy feeling of it. So in the end, as long as you get the most power in a racket that you want, while keeping your preferred weight/stiffness/head balance/control / overall feeling, I think that is what you should aim for.

oh, and I am curious, I've read Dinkalot's badminton racket review and he rates NS9000X(3U) more powerful than a AT900P(4U), but has anyone compared the 3U versions of both rackets? I own a 3U AT900P myself and I am curious whether it has more power at the same weight? (I heard both rackets were very stiff) Someone enlighten me because I don't own a NS9000X and no one around me owns one

[silentheart]

FYI, I did own a AT900p 3U when it first came out. I also have 2 NS9k-x (1 in 2 U and 1 in 3U) I feel NS9k-x 3U is easier for me to smash and easier to clear. My guess (only a guess) is NS9k-x has longer shaft vs AT900-p. With my holding style of all the way to the butt end, a lot of energy got absorbed by the handle of AT900-p. This is just my theory. Feel free to add or disagree with mt guess.

[hiroisuke]

But my point that I am trying to argue is, shouldn't power be the most important thing?...


@martin8768 (http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/member.php?u=18888)
@DivingBirdie (http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/member.php?u=13624)
@jhirata (http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/member.php?u=28097)
@hiroisuke (http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/member.php?u=20731)
Are you guys even reading the 1st page? I've already said that this thread statement refers to when choosing a racket because power is hard to build it up, I don't literally mean "Power> Everything Else." Of course you need more than just power in a real match of badminton. Read the main post next time

Yes, I read exactly what you said. I still disagree, no matter which way it's phrased. Whether it's about the racket, about the playing style, etc. In this thread it's about choosing a racket. My personal opinion is that a racket that feels most comfortable, provides the best control (consistency of shots), and provides the best response (accurate touch feedback of the hit, as in whether you sliced the shot, how much you sliced it, and/or how hard the shot was) is my favorite, and thus the best for me. Also, yes, power is difficult to build up...just like technique, and endurance, and speed, and many other things.

Remember a few things:
1) It's my opinion.
2) You asked for an opinion in the title thread.
3) I have a brain.
4) I read the main post.

[Oldhand]

Thanks mod, for helping me change my thread description :P
Um, your original thread-title is what has made this thread bristle :cool:

[Daylightkiller]

i think that skill is far more important. but when choosing a racket just find one that you are comfortable with, that helps you where you strengths are. for example if you are a power player who likes to smash, find one that has good power, if you like to drop and so forth, find a racket that's easily controllable. but in my opinion, you cannot get a racket with pure power and no control.

[sifuyono]

IMO, power just one aspect you may consider when choosing a racquet. Many other important consideration, such weight, manouverability, durability, stiffness, etc.
You surely do not want a super power racquet with low accuracy, which you may blast a supersonic shuttle but out of the court.
Generally, headheaviness offer more momentum, but less manouverability. Stiffer shaft offer more accuracy, but probably not friendly to produce some power in common player. Except you're a bomber, i don't reccomend an extra stiff shaft, even you may compensate it by lowering your string tension.

So, is power > everything else? My answer is NO.

[sifuyono]

If a racquet can be rating like a point
Example: Racquet A - power 8, defense 2
Racquet B - power 5 defense 5
Then i'll chose B, cause playing badminton is not only about how hard you hit, how hard you attack, but remember that you'll also get attacked by your opponent. Just my two cents.

[Jurethatsme]

If a racquet can be rating like a point
Example: Racquet A - power 8, defense 2
Racquet B - power 5 defense 5
Then i'll chose B, cause playing badminton is not only about how hard you hit, how hard you attack, but remember that you'll also get attacked by your opponent. Just my two cents.

I would also choose B in this case, but half of the elite pros choose A (AT700)! :)

[phandrew]

I tend to buy a racket that focuses more on my weakness which is defence which is why i buy head light rackets (NS and MP series) and not heavy head rackets (AT series).

[jhirata]

I would also choose B in this case, but half of the elite pros choose A (AT700)! :)
That's because for example ( like in a pc game ):
Lee Chong Wei for example, has a base attack of 8 and 9 defence. His defence ( well every other elite pro's defence ) is high enough, so they can increase their attack by perhaps 1, with an at900p. However, this weird theory of mine wouldnt work for most of us, our defence is like 3, compared to LCW. :D