I came across this Y-frame badminton racket in a catalogue from a few years back and I was thinking about how there aren't really any in the online stores anymore. What happened to them? Were they just a failure in innovation?

Also, have you ever owned one and if so, what differences did you notice between the y-frame and the conventional rackets?

You meaning the Prince style Rackets http://www.andrewsavory.com/blog/images/racket_prince_catalyst.jpg

Oh so it's patented?

I've only ever seen Prince Rackets like this so i would guess so. Either that or other manufacturers don't see any potential in it.

Oh so it's patented?i'm sure the patent has expired.

i'm sure the patent has expired.
Not surprised lol. Why would you want to keep a patent on something as hideous as that :p

It looks structurally weaker as well.

Not surprised lol. Why would you want to keep a patent on something as hideous as that :p

It looks structurally weaker as well.

Prince moved on since then, they put holes in their rackets now :D

http://www.sweatband.com/upload/products/main/Prince-03-Speedport-Black-Badminton-Racket.jpg

Prince moved on since then, they put holes in their rackets now :D

http://www.sweatband.com/upload/products/main/Prince-03-Speedport-Black-Badminton-Racket.jpg
The Prince designer needs replaced :P:D:cool:

Actually, I think the Y-shape is a much better technology than the O-ports :-)

Actually I am a bit puzzled why they dropped the Y-shape, I think it was a nice differentiator for them marketing, sales wise..

/Twobeer

Actually, I think the Y-shape is a much better technology than the O-ports :-)

Actually I am a bit puzzled why they dropped the Y-shape, I think it was a nice differentiator for them marketing, sales wise..

/Twobeer

I must agree with you there. As much as the Y-shape is fairly ugly, I would think that the sweetspot would be massive. The O-ports though, I just don't know what they do other than possibly make the frame weaker.

Guy that I've played with a couple of times has one of them.. I don't like the look of it. I can't see the point of a greater hitting area from expansion of the racquet head's surface towards the grip.

Guy that I've played with a couple of times has one of them.. I don't like the look of it. I can't see the point of a greater hitting area from expansion of the racquet head's surface towards the grip.

Good point, I guess that it's not needed if you can consistently hit the sweetspot. The only thing I can think of is that by lengthening some of the main strings, they've made it more forgiving.

Good point, I guess that it's not needed if you can consistently hit the sweetspot. The only thing I can think of is that by lengthening some of the main strings, they've made it more forgiving.

If you can make 100% of all shots hit the sweetspot, any tech. increasing sweetspot size is meaningless :p.. The idea is basically the same with ISO-frames versus oval.. It you hit the sweetspot each time an oval shape racket will be more powerful (given all things else being equal :-) )..

Take a look at current squash rackets and compare with the ones of the 70s... Y-shape is dominating squash racket design today...

/Twobeer

Yes, but squash is a different sort of game in terms of space to manoeuvre. You are more likely to get shots close in to your body off a fast paced rebound, in which case the Y-frame would be beneficial. In badminton I think reach for shots you're stretching for is more important than shots closer to your grip.

I got one myself more than 15 years ago. It was OK!

Prince moved on since then, they put holes in their rackets now :D

http://www.sweatband.com/upload/products/main/Prince-03-Speedport-Black-Badminton-Racket.jpg
That doesn't look too bad actually!

i've still got 3 of the prince Y shaped racquets and use them fairly regularly.
no idea if the technology is helpful, i'm of the mind that technology is just mumbo jumbo nonsense anyway, but i have been using these racquets for a while now and guess have just gotten used to them.
also, they are indestructable, so i'm not sure about the structurally weaker statement.

i've still got 3 of the prince Y shaped racquets and use them fairly regularly.
no idea if the technology is helpful, i'm of the mind that technology is just mumbo jumbo nonsense anyway, but i have been using these racquets for a while now and guess have just gotten used to them.
also, they are indestructable, so i'm not sure about the structurally weaker statement.

What are the preposed advantages of the Y-frame, stated by Prince?

I just made an uneducated observation, which was my first impression. In my opinion, I thought it looked weaker.

From Prince website:

"The Prince® Y-joint design provides superior torsional stiffness, because the head portion connect to the shaft at an angle, allowing bending and torsional stresses to be balanced. In addition the Y-joint design provides longer strings resulting in an expanded power zone."


I have one, and it's an amazing defensive racket. Never saw too many other users though, so I'd guess they never sold all that well.

Prince still make Y-joint rackets, but unfortunately it's only their low-end models now.

O-Ports work really well in tennis-rackets, so it's no great surprise that Prince wanted to put the same technology into their badminton rackets (plus they've spent all that money on R&D so they're damn well going to use it every way they can).
Supposedly, they improve aerodynamics and allow you to swing 24% faster, which if true, is very impressive. I'd love to try one out, but they're just too expensive :(

Perhaps what they should have done, is put O-Ports into a Y-joint racket.

Out of interest, anyone remember a badminton racket shaped like a squash racket, without a shaft as such? Would have been from about 2002-2003 I think, and I have no idea of the brand. And no, it definitely wasn't just a squash racket ;)

What are the preposed advantages of the Y-frame, stated by Prince?

I just made an uneducated observation, which was my first impression. In my opinion, I thought it looked weaker.

haha, i wasn't having a go at you, i'm just stating a fact based on my personal experience. i've had those racquets for 15 years, and nothing seems to break up. they're well battered, but are the ultimate survivors.

i think i've seen some of those, they are sort of Y framed as well but rather than the more isometric look the Princes have, these ones were more roundish. is that what you're talking about?

From Prince website:

"The Prince® Y-joint design provides superior torsional stiffness, because the head portion connect to the shaft at an angle, allowing bending and torsional stresses to be balanced. In addition the Y-joint design provides longer strings resulting in an expanded power zone."


I have one, and it's an amazing defensive racket. Never saw too many other users though, so I'd guess they never sold all that well.

Prince still make Y-joint rackets, but unfortunately it's only their low-end models now.

O-Ports work really well in tennis-rackets, so it's no great surprise that Prince wanted to put the same technology into their badminton rackets (plus they've spent all that money on R&D so they're damn well going to use it every way they can).
Supposedly, they improve aerodynamics and allow you to swing 24% faster, which if true, is very impressive. I'd love to try one out, but they're just too expensive :(

Perhaps what they should have done, is put O-Ports into a Y-joint racket.

Out of interest, anyone remember a badminton racket shaped like a squash racket, without a shaft as such? Would have been from about 2002-2003 I think, and I have no idea of the brand. And no, it definitely wasn't just a squash racket ;)

Yeah maybe, kind of teardrop shaped.
Like this: http://www.badmintonforum.com/vb/showthread.php?p=788007
...but without the long shaft, if I remember right. And blue.

I guess they wouldn't be allowed under the current rules.

From Prince website:

"The Prince® Y-joint design provides superior torsional stiffness, because the head portion connect to the shaft at an angle, allowing bending and torsional stresses to be balanced. In addition the Y-joint design provides longer strings resulting in an expanded power zone."


I have one, and it's an amazing defensive racket. Never saw too many other users though, so I'd guess they never sold all that well.

Prince still make Y-joint rackets, but unfortunately it's only their low-end models now.

O-Ports work really well in tennis-rackets, so it's no great surprise that Prince wanted to put the same technology into their badminton rackets (plus they've spent all that money on R&D so they're damn well going to use it every way they can).
Supposedly, they improve aerodynamics and allow you to swing 24% faster, which if true, is very impressive. I'd love to try one out, but they're just too expensive :(

Perhaps what they should have done, is put O-Ports into a Y-joint racket.

Out of interest, anyone remember a badminton racket shaped like a squash racket, without a shaft as such? Would have been from about 2002-2003 I think, and I have no idea of the brand. And no, it definitely wasn't just a squash racket ;)
If Prince hasn't got that patented anymore (I'm supposing it was in the first place, but I'm going to have to check on that later), why has Isometric rackets taken over the market? Maybe it suggests that it is a more efficient way of providing the benefits of the larger sweetspot. Whether it provides any of the other benefits that the Y-frame does, someone else would know better than me.

haha, i wasn't having a go at you, i'm just stating a fact based on my personal experience. i've had those racquets for 15 years, and nothing seems to break up. they're well battered, but are the ultimate survivors.

Being a forum veteran myself, I can seem a bit defensive sometimes :p

What was the racket made from?

:cool:Yeah maybe, kind of teardrop shaped.
Like this: http://www.badmintonforum.com/vb/showthread.php?p=788007
...but without the long shaft, if I remember right. And blue.

I guess they wouldn't be allowed under the current rules.

Perhaps Prince was trying to bring back that style that Kennex had introduced...

Edit: Sorry for being ignorant, but why would it not be allowed? Are you only allowed the traditional Oval and Isometric shaped heads in tournament play?

Being a forum veteran myself, I can seem a bit defensive sometimes :p

What was the racket made from?

made from the same material as most, carbon graphite. none of that fancy yonex nano technology.

i've heard a rumour that one of the reasons they stopped making them was because they were against the rules due to the size of the racquet head. i don't know how far that's true though.

"4.2.2.2 the overall length of the stringed area does not then exceed 330 mm."

The Prince and Kennex rackets would be allowed.
The ones I'm thinking of, the stringed area might be too long. Not sure though, they might have had a cross-piece at the bottom of the frame, like a tennis racket does, I don't remember. I could just be imagining it all of course - it was about 7 years ago.

Prince actually own the patents on both Y-Joint and the original Teardrop shaped rackets:
http://www.google.com/patents?id=iREjAAAAEBAJ&dq=y-joint+badminton
http://www.google.com/patents?id=suUlAAAAEBAJ&dq=y-joint+badminton

Y-frames are nothing new. They existed even in the 1920s. In the All England in 1923 winners of two titles played with a Slazengers "GAT" badminton racquet which looked similar to the Y-frame racquet. Later in 1936 there was a racquet called Hazell's 'Streamlined', with thin shaft but 'supports' on each side of it from frame to shaft. It looked more like a long Y-frame racquet with another thin shaft in the middle. Looked wierd, like a 3-shaft racquet.