User Tag List

View Poll Results: do you prefer Isometric or Oval?

Voters
1442. You may not vote on this poll
  • Isometric

    1,068 74.06%
  • Oval

    374 25.94%
Page 27 of 33 FirstFirst ... 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 LastLast
Results 443 to 459 of 559
  1. #443
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,645
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tanta58 View Post
    yes coz dey will string the main 1st so the head of the racket will be shorter...so u ned 2lbs to hab the racket back to its iso shape...duno if u can understnd coz i duno how to explain

    u can go to dis link 4 mre info:
    http://www.badmintoncentral.com/foru...2Fcross&page=2
    or
    http://www.badmintoncentral.com/foru...2Fcross&page=2

    hope it help u
    When your racket is mounted on the stringing machine, it should not deform by too much. The distortion of the frame happens when you remove the racket from the support of the stringing machine. This happens because when you string the mains, the string is straight. When you string the cross, the cross will increase the tension of the mains by bending them due to the weave.

  2. #444
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Look it doesn't matter if your racquet is oval or iso, so long as each racquet's overall length is exactly the same before stringing and after stringing. This is the ultimate test-most stringers cannot come close.
    Next time try this: if your racquet overall length before stringing is 674.5mm long, it should be exactly 674.5mm after stringing. This is the perfect way to equalize any undue stress on the frame.

  3. #445
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    20
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default difference between iso and oval

    Huge difference between the two racquet types. Some prefer iso and others oval. Try before you commit to one style.

    IMHO, oval are better, usually slightly shorter racquets with less weight in the shoulders (near the tip of the racquet), therefore better swing speed for same weight of racquet, even for head heavy racquets. Shorter shaft length also increases swing speed.

    Iso have slightly increased area where shot will be hit with adequate speed, but the 'sweet spot' defined as the one point at which the shuttle will come off best, is the same for both types of racquets, no matter what any one says, incluing Yonex.

    As Taneepak has said, and I agree with him, the sweet spot can be changed by changing stringing patterns and frame size.

    Does it really matter??? I'll put it this way, Lin Dan will beat you with the worst racquet in you collection!!!!!!!!!


    Quote Originally Posted by alphazed1 View Post
    even i am confused... wht does it mean to say tht u can make the sweet spot disappear on an Iso... ???... talk is whether ISo has a larger sweet spot or not...
    infact... now tht we have a thread can anybody help me with wht othe diff does a Iso and oval racquet have??... lets say u have both 3U.. flexi shafts... so apart frm the sweet spot thing wht else diff do they both have??

  4. #446
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    Look it doesn't matter if your racquet is oval or iso, so long as each racquet's overall length is exactly the same before stringing and after stringing. This is the ultimate test-most stringers cannot come close.
    Next time try this: if your racquet overall length before stringing is 674.5mm long, it should be exactly 674.5mm after stringing. This is the perfect way to equalize any undue stress on the frame.
    wrong, dead wrong. A stringer can still wreck a racket even when the end resulting length is unchanged. Definitely not the ultimate nor perfect way to judge quality of stringing.
    Last edited by cooler; 03-05-2009 at 05:41 PM.

  5. #447
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler View Post
    wrong, dead wrong. A stringer can still wreck a racket even when the end resulting length is unchanged. Definitely not the ultimate nor perfect way to judge quality of stringing.
    I am talking about a strung racquet in the normal sense and not about a wrecked racquet. Also a strung racquet that has been wrecked by poor stringing is unlikely to measure the same overall length as before stringing.
    BTW, how many of you have this perfect same overall length of before and after stringing? Very expensive stringing machines do not guarantee this can be achieved every time.

  6. #448
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    vancouver
    Posts
    28
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    you want power ? ISO is better , for quick swing ? OVAL ! i can use both !

  7. #449
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    4,661
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    I am talking about a strung racquet in the normal sense and not about a wrecked racquet. Also a strung racquet that has been wrecked by poor stringing is unlikely to measure the same overall length as before stringing.
    BTW, how many of you have this perfect same overall length of before and after stringing? Very expensive stringing machines do not guarantee this can be achieved every time.
    1) Please state your condition at beginning of your post. Also define your claim by given a more clear definition like ex. using Yonex standard pattern for a specific model with 2 lb or 10% rule. You are confusing us by posting earlier that you can shift sweet spot by using different pattern.
    2) I have test it on my Cab30ms before, the racquet has no noticable difference (based on your measuring length by setting it against wall) in length before and after stringing @ 22x24 lb. However, the head shape is different between top down vs throat up.
    3) Have you done a racquet with exactly same length before and after stringing? If I remember from your prior post, you did not use lazer to measure the length before and after. So what is your measurement error?

  8. #450
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I guarantee my stringing will have the same shape and length as before stringing. BTW, different racquet shapes will require different fine tuning to achieve this, otherwise what works fo a standard iso will not work for a standard oval-Cab 30 ms is not a standard oval; Cab 20 is.

  9. #451
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,645
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    I guarantee my stringing will have the same shape and length as before stringing. BTW, different racquet shapes will require different fine tuning to achieve this, otherwise what works fo a standard iso will not work for a standard oval-Cab 30 ms is not a standard oval; Cab 20 is.
    Standard oval? Who sets the standard?

  10. #452
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    I guarantee my stringing will have the same shape and length as before stringing. BTW, different racquet shapes will require different fine tuning to achieve this, otherwise what works fo a standard iso will not work for a standard oval-Cab 30 ms is not a standard oval; Cab 20 is.
    unless one has a infinite supporting points, no strung racket can have the same shape as the unstrung frame. To my knowledge, that stringing machine is not available in the market yet.

  11. #453
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by weeyeh View Post
    Standard oval? Who sets the standard?
    There are many definitions of standard. One such definition refers to something such as a practice or a product that is widely recognized as a point of reference after which other similar things are compared.
    The Yonex Cab 20 was the first Yonex graphite oval shaped racquet that came out a quarter of a century ago and was considered a classic after which other ovals were compared.

  12. #454
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler View Post
    unless one has a infinite supporting points, no strung racket can have the same shape as the unstrung frame. To my knowledge, that stringing machine is not available in the market yet.
    Ah Cooler, you are always thinking inside the box. Of course I can string them to have exactly the same shape as an unstrung racquet. It is not machine-dependent; but nice try, but I am not sharing.

  13. #455
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    1,645
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    There are many definitions of standard. One such definition refers to something such as a practice or a product that is widely recognized as a point of reference after which other similar things are compared.
    The Yonex Cab 20 was the first Yonex graphite oval shaped racquet that came out a quarter of a century ago and was considered a classic after which other ovals were compared.
    Huh?? okay, nevermind...

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    Ah Cooler, you are always thinking inside the box. Of course I can string them to have exactly the same shape as an unstrung racquet. It is not machine-dependent; but nice try, but I am not sharing.
    Nice try and very scientific indeed. Happy staying outside the box.

  14. #456
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak View Post
    Ah Cooler, you are always thinking inside the box. Of course I can string them to have exactly the same shape as an unstrung racquet. It is not machine-dependent; but nice try, but I am not sharing.
    exact same shape as an unstrung racquet?
    like your effortless power e-10000 racket too?
    your claim is self explanatory enough.
    u dont need to share, i don't read your previous posts on stringing.
    If u remember, i only debated with u on oval vs isometric, and about sweet spot and racket shape. I never commented on your pattern, knots and other stringing stuff coz i don't read them. I already have my own ways of stringing. Readers can make there own belief about your exact before and after shapes
    Last edited by cooler; 04-01-2009 at 01:29 AM.

  15. #457
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by weeyeh View Post
    Huh?? okay, nevermind...
    hahaha, yup.
    I thought standard oval means pertaining to the oval shape, not its material composition. I believe cab 7,8,9 are all ovals and all came before cab 20. I guess taneepak's standard is too high for us. However, u saved yourself a breath of air....
    Last edited by cooler; 04-01-2009 at 01:45 AM.

  16. #458
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Don't you agree the Cab 20 that came out 25 yrears ago can be regarded as having set a standard for a quality oval graphite racquet?
    Also, don't you think that the use of a paired flying clamps clamping onto 3 strings is now an almost industry standard? FYI, this came from me. I was then too generous.
    In addition, I would say that a 2-pc stringing pattern with the top/down cross stringing, instead of Yonex's bottom/up pattern, but with the first two cross strings at the top at a 5%-10% higher tension than the other cross strings, gives the best playability? This is what I do. Maybe you can try it.
    Yes, I can string an oval or an iso to have identical length, width, and shape before and after stringing. As I have said, this is not machine-dependent although it still requires at least a 4-point machine. This is my significant edge over other stringers. I am sure you will understand my reluctance to share. BTW, Cooler, I have never posted any posts that are even close to providing any clue to this 'mirror-image' stringing shape. So you will be wasting your time going back a few years.

  17. #459
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    read the thread title, it is about oval vs iso head, nothing about all graphite construction.
    cab 8 out sold cab 20. Like i said, your standard is too high for us. It is very painful and confusing to read your stringing posts, that is why i don't read it, why read your old stringing posts when i dont read your current one? Best playability, how can u be sure best playability for others? U can give or not give advice, your choice, don't hinge that decision because of me, i don't read or try to understand your stringing posts. it is give me headache reading it. What make u think i follow your procedure when i have so many disagreement with you on countless topics?
    please don't spiel about stringing in this oval vs iso shape racket thread
    Last edited by cooler; 04-01-2009 at 02:43 AM.

Page 27 of 33 FirstFirst ... 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
  •