Between the 2 kinds of clear, attacking clear and high deep clear? Also the shuttlecocks I often use are only club grades, tend to be slower than tournament grades like Aerosensa40. Speed is more like 76-77 but after a few hard smashes should even go slower when we should be using 77-78.
Less energy required for attacking clears. If you were using 77-78 shuttles your attacking clears will surely go out when striking harder.
Could someone explain the exact difference between these two kinds of clears?? A video demonstrating both would be super!
A high clear is higher than an attacking clear. A high clear will take more energy because you need to impart more speed unto the shuttle to make it reach the back when compared to a flat/attacking clear
Then i am in deep sh*& because I can't even last a 3 mins of attacking clears rally, baseline to baseline. By the end my clears would have been too low, attacking clears are supposed to be high enough so they cannot intercept when they are standing in mid-court. How about u guys? Particularly intermediate-advanced level.
when you say three minute rally of clears, are you just standing at the back clearing to each other, or returning to base? even so, it should be pretty easy because you don't have to move anywhere very fast.
Returning to base, but only half-court strokes. However, i tested the shuttlecocks we used and found out that i can never get them over to the back service line of doubles. Almost always a foot or 2 short. No matter how hard I do the underhand/under waist swing from the other end of the court the shuttle only gets to 3/4 of the length of the opponent's court (7/8 full length of entire court, can never touch the double's rear service line.
I am talking about speedtest of shuttlecocks, not defending any smashes. And also just warming up strokes of attacking clears between 2 players in half-court.
the shuttle you are using are way too slow. (or you need to hit the gym!). can the people you play with do a successful speed test with the same shuttle? oh. and attacking clear uses less energy. simply because your not hitting its as high. deep clear, you hit it high enough so the shuttle can drop almost vertically on to the back line. attacking clear, all you have to do is hit it high and far enough to lob your opponent, which might not be that high or far.
I am using local made shuttlecocks not available internationally n they only cost $4.50 a dozen. Yonex Aerosensa cost $30+ per dozen here n not many players are using them.
what science says I've attached a diagram with trajectories of the shuttle. The blue and red curves are clears, the blue is an attack clear, the red one a high defensive clear. The differences are: red is deep into the air, takes longer, lands shorter and the shuttle only has about 1.5 m/s terminal speed, according to theoretical study at hand; the blue one travels a longer horizontal distance, is faster overall and has a faster 6.5 m/s terminal speed. Note, both shuttles are hit with a 56 m/s overhead stroke (clear). Interpretation: given the same amount of energy used to produce a 56 m/s shot, the angle determines the distance, duration and the speed with which the opponent needs to work with, the attack clear is faster despite the same initial speed. One factor invisible in the diagram is the drag force of the feather resisting air that already sets in at 22 m/s or 80 km/h, it stops the shuttle pretty hard above these speeds thus making the initial angle even more important for the flight. Result: the attack clear would need slower speeds to reach an equal distance when clearing. Note: 56 m/s is comparable to a advanced player's hard smash at 200 km/h.
i think the energy usage is not really a concern here. and I dont think theres a lot of different between energy usage in both clears. I prefer to use attacking clears because i like to play with higher pace (like taufik usually do in lower ranking games) instead of slow game ( like lindan, lee chong wei.) It is just more interesting and more fun to play in higher pace. and maybe im just a keen risk taker lol. u also can really take good advantage against a beginner-intermediate opponents using attacking clear as they'll need good skills in performing the clear (doing a "fast but not till its out of the court" clear isnt really easy without the proper technique) regarding energy, i think the things that really use up our energy in a rally are the cross court glides/dives/whatever (cuz you need to cover the longest area) and the hardcore smashes (cuz it requires you to give more power input). hope this helps. have a nice day. "hold the racket like you are cutting veggies/carrots with a small knife, adjust the thumb so that it is pointing downward. grip the handle 'firmly' with your fingers (not with your palm). with loose wrist, pronate (forehand) and supinate (backhand) your arm. remember the trade between being loose and being tight (elasticity). relax, wait for the shuttle to come closer, at the right moment, swing at the back loosely (wrist not fingers) and counter them the swing back but with more forces (like a whip). the feel should be like 'gummy' and 'whippy'. get the concept, get the feelings. practice."
Agreed with above, if you're playing singles, you should be fit enough to be able to play 3 games at full pace playing any shot. If you cant do that, it wont be your shot choice, more your fitness. IMO energy only comes into it if you smash a heck of a lot, clears give you more time, attacking clears give you less time, high clears give you more time to recover.
If you're talking about footwork covering the diagonal line, Gollum of Badminton Bible may disagree with you. The zig-zag movement (V-shape) and the coverage of repeated shots actually consume more energy, because you'd need to overcome your own momentum (rather than maintaining it in diagonal run case). Two of my kid's coaches empathize the use of fingers, not wrist, not arm. They're both National level players, one previously Chinese National Team.
As a side note the on the energy usage between the 2 clears in game situations: While attacking clears may take less energy to hit sucessfully to the back of the court due to the shuttle not needing to travel the extra distance of a higher clear, using attacking clears will often speed up the tempo of the game. If your attacking clear isn't good enough, it will often be intercepted much earlier than a high clear, forcing you to move earlier and faster from shot->base->next shot. Even if you're attacking clear is good you still generally have to be ready for the next shot earlier than a deep high defensive clear which gives you extra time to prepare and get set for the next shot. I'm somewhat out of shape, hard pressed to keep up my level of play over the course a full 3-set singles match these days (i'm somewhat intermediate if that helps). And I can tell you that I can pretty much play for hours on end at a slower tempo and can be wiped out in minutes when the tempo of shots (how many shots hit in a fixed time period) starts to go up.
sorry to interrupt , but why would you not just hit a deceptive drop (use different spin) from the back and return to the base ( ready position) ....that will save more energy . that is what I was trained to do in singles. And when you are tired , a clear is not ideal as you need a good length , otherwise they will be dispatch or you will be running round the court . I play more in MD, so dont use the high clear much as you would want to be the team that is first to initiate the attack ..
