User Tag List

View Poll Results: do you prefer Isometric or Oval?

Voters
1438. You may not vote on this poll
  • Isometric

    1,064 73.99%
  • Oval

    374 26.01%
Page 21 of 33 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 LastLast
Results 341 to 357 of 559
  1. #341
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Just imagine a technically correct iso will have a square shape. How do you think it will play? Also the head dimensions, especially at the width sides at the top, will have an impact on the racquet's center of gravity. A racquet with extended shoulders has a different center of gravity than the classic oval, AOTBE. You can also simulate this by adding lead tape to the shoulders and have a few swing.

  2. #342
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    Silentheart, if you were a Yonex salesman you would have been told off by Yonex R & D re Isometric head size. FYI, Isometric is a Yonex "invention", in case you are not aware of it. This is what Yonex R & D says :

    FYI, isometric shape head design was not a yonex invention. Only the word 'isometric' was coined by yonex

    ISOMETRIC.
    This Yonex development continues to "fire" players to victory. The Isometric Square Head Shape provides a 32% larger effective hitting area than a conventional racquet (oval). Unlike a conventional racquet with main and cross strings of varying length, the Isometric Square Head Shape equalizes the length of main and cross strings in the stringbed, enlarging the sweetspot for more consistent shot accuracy even on off-centre hits.
    Yes, I am saying that iso has a bigger head than an oval. So does Yonex.

    not necessary true. Some ovals can be bigger than iso heads
    ....................................
    Last edited by cooler; 08-17-2008 at 01:59 PM.

  3. #343
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Melbourne, Australia
    Posts
    3,650
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If yonex didn't design the isometric frame then who did?

  4. #344
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Clementi
    Posts
    146
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    in the 80s when i was playing badminton in my back yard i was using a carlton steel frame racket and its not oval in shape...more like isometric frame... and i don't think yonex racket was the 1st isometric racket.

  5. #345
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Marlboro View Post
    in the 80s when i was playing badminton in my back yard i was using a carlton steel frame racket and its not oval in shape...more like isometric frame... and i don't think yonex racket was the 1st isometric racket.
    yes, there was a photo in BF posted long time ago but i can't find it. However, that racket maker did not patent it or trademark it.

  6. #346
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    20
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by speedy View Post
    For amateurs, forget about getting the most expensive racquets & hoping that it will improve your game 100%, it's impossible. If you are an amateur using the latest most expensive ISO racquet up against an experienced good player, the good player will outplay you even with an old steel racquet. Trust me.

    Or even gd ol' wooden rackets :P

  7. #347
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler View Post
    yes, there was a photo in BF posted long time ago but i can't find it. However, that racket maker did not patent it or trademark it.
    I don't believe you can patent a racquet head shape or the names oval, isometric, or any funny names. Oval and isometric are English words like square and circle and Yonex would not want to "steal" common words and patent them. Just imagine someone taking out a patent for air and water. You know how much money can be made from these two very basic necessities? Reminds me about an American company patenting the word "BASMATI" for their Texas rice, which tastes more like low quality rice you have to pay somebody to eat it.

  8. #348
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,638
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by phandrew View Post
    If yonex didn't design the isometric frame then who did?
    ROX design and manufacture the first ISO racquet. I actually had one in very early 80. However, it fail because of durability issue. If I remember right, the manufacture closed since late 80.

  9. #349
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,638
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You may not pattern the word "ISO" or "ISOMETRIC", However, you can pattern the design of it. You can also trade mark "ISOMETRIC" in a specific product. Just like Microsoft trade mark "Window" in operating system.
    I thought someone claim he worked in international trade business before?
    Last edited by silentheart; 08-18-2008 at 08:42 AM.

  10. #350
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silentheart View Post
    You may not pattern the word "ISO" or "ISOMETRIC", However, you can pattern the design of it. You can also trade mark "ISOMETRIC" in a specific product. Just like Microsoft trade mark "Window" in operating system.
    I thought someone claim he worked in international trade business before?
    You cannot patent common words. A patent grants a property right to the inventor that will prevent anyone else from making, using, or selling an invention.
    You are confusing patents with trademarks. A trademark-and there are trademarks and registered trademarks-is used to protect a word, a symbol, a device, or a name that is used for the purpose of trading goods. The word "Window" is not a Microsoft trademark. However the words "Windows Vista" is a Microsoft trademark. Pls note "Windows Vista" is not a common word, just a trade name to trade goods/services.
    If what you are claiming that "Window" is a Microsoft trademark is true, then Microsoft would be able to earn even more money from suing trademark violations of its trademark than from its Windows Operating System. You would make a very good patent and trademark legal counsel for Microsoft.

  11. #351
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    I don't believe you can patent a racquet head shape or the names oval, isometric, or any funny names. Oval and isometric are English words like square and circle and Yonex would not want to "steal" common words and patent them. Just imagine someone taking out a patent for air and water. You know how much money can be made from these two very basic necessities? Reminds me about an American company patenting the word "BASMATI" for their Texas rice, which tastes more like low quality rice you have to pay somebody to eat it.
    what are u trying to say?? Didn't i said 'racket maker did not patent it** or trademark it'???? aren't u rephrasing what i've said ??? Yes, SH is right, one can trademark a logo or certain word/words or a slogan.

    yonex still can patent an isometric design if they really really want to but it would serve little or no useful purpose because money reward is not there. I will not elaborate the whys now.
    Last edited by cooler; 08-18-2008 at 11:57 AM.

  12. #352
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,638
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    1) Yonex never pattened Isometric Frame design of badminton frame because Yonex was not the first company came up with that design. Nor any one here claim Yonex holds patten to ISO frame design. It is you, Mr. Taneepak, who try to confuse the issue and putting words in other people's mouth.
    2) Oh, yes, MS did trademark "Window" for operating system. Just like Apple Computer trademark the name "Apple" and "Ipod" for a device. If you wish, do a search on Google on Window trade mark case, I thought you are pretty good at just search internet and post whatever you find on it.
    3) Once again, please do not invent facts. Facts are verifiable. Your statement is not.

  13. #353
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silentheart View Post
    1) Yonex never pattened Isometric Frame design of badminton frame because Yonex was not the first company came up with that design. Nor any one here claim Yonex holds patten to ISO frame design. It is you, Mr. Taneepak, who try to confuse the issue and putting words in other people's mouth.
    2) Oh, yes, MS did trademark "Window" for operating system. Just like Apple Computer trademark the name "Apple" and "Ipod" for a device. If you wish, do a search on Google on Window trade mark case, I thought you are pretty good at just search internet and post whatever you find on it.
    3) Once again, please do not invent facts. Facts are verifiable. Your statement is not.
    Look, I said earlier that you cannot patent common words like oval, window, etc., because a patent is filed for an invention. Nowhere did I bring up the word trademark then, until you slid it in later in an effort to confuse it with patent by bringing in Microsoft's Window Operating system. Pls go back to the previous posts and ascertain the first author of the word "trademark"-Silentheart.
    BTW, the word window is not a trademark. If it is how come I can use it here? Also how can window suppiers continue to sell windows and advertising their windows for sale without a blast from Microsoft?
    It is patent and let us stick to patent. You cannot patent the word "isometric" or "oval" even if you were the first to come up with the designs. Inventions, not words, are patentable.

  14. #354
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by silentheart View Post
    1)
    2) Oh, yes, MS did trademark "Window" for operating system. Just like Apple Computer trademark the name "Apple" and "Ipod" for a device.
    Silentheart, do you know what you are talking about? How in the world can you trademark common words like window, let alone patent it? Why don't you check with your company's lawyers, before you become a laughing stock of patent and trademark lawyers.

  15. #355
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,638
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Your honor, I rest my case.
    http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal...e/windows.mspx

    By the way, did you check you claim against Cab30ms vs MP99?
    I never claim Yonex patten the word "Isometric". Nor I claim it trademarked the word. I only say Yonex did not pattern the design of ISO frame because some other company did it before Yonex. Also, I did not claim Yonex trademark "Isomatric". Same as I said MS trademarked "Windows" for operating system. Nothing more.

    PS, Is my English really that bad that you can not understand what I try to explain to you?

  16. #356
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Silentheart, you don't get it, do you? Maybe you cannot see the forest for the trees. I have said that you cannot patent or trademark common words. The words apple and window are common words to mean the windows you find in your house and the word apple is a fruit you can eat. That is why "Apple" and "Windows" can still be used by anyone in their common words and meanings because common words cannot be patented or trademarked. Apple and Windows have to be very specific that they are not selling windows or apples (common words with common meanings) and must beyond all doubts specify/imply to the user that these words are related to computers and their operating software and have nothing connected with these common words.
    BTW, Microsoft's trademark on "Windows" was actually turned down as being too generic when it first applied. Its second application a few years later was approved, some say under circumstances that may be challenged.

  17. #357
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    What is the basis of checking a Cab30MS and an MP99? When we compare two items we must have one common basis or the same parameter. To compare an oval of one model with an iso of another model with any meaningful results, we must use a common parameter.
    For example, let us use the parameters of a racquet head dimensions as specified in the BWF laws. The laws say that the racquet stringed area shall not exceed a certain overall length and a certain overall width. Therefore, for a fair comparison between an oval and an iso, both the overall length and overall width of the racquets to be compared must be the same. Otherwise it is like comparing a kid's racquet with one that is used by an adult. Let us say Cab ABC oval has a stringed area with an overall length of 240mm and an overall width of 187mm, we must therefore use an iso, say Isometric ABC with the same overall length of 240mm and overall width of 188mm. This is comparing the two on a common parameter. Needless to say, the Isometric ABC will have a much larger stringed area. How can it be the other way around?

Page 21 of 33 FirstFirst ... 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Head heavy very stiff Oval Head racket ???
    By pussiii999 in forum Racket Recommendation / Comparison
    Replies: 17
    : 12-19-2008, 05:19 AM
  2. Square/Isometric or Oval/Traditional ?
    By eh7eh7 in forum Racket Recommendation / Comparison
    Replies: 1
    : 03-27-2006, 08:30 AM
  3. Oval head, isometric head and ovaliso head.
    By Extremesmash in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 5
    : 11-18-2004, 01:39 PM
  4. switching to oval from isometric head shape
    By Josh in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 4
    : 12-18-2001, 03:19 AM
  5. Isometric vs. Oval Head
    By Vy in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 14
    : 09-18-2001, 12:18 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •