User Tag List

View Poll Results: do you prefer Isometric or Oval?

Voters
1444. You may not vote on this poll
  • Isometric

    1,070 74.10%
  • Oval

    374 25.90%
Page 4 of 33 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ... LastLast
Results 52 to 68 of 559
  1. #52
    Administrator kwun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Santa Clara, California, United States
    Posts
    36,155
    Mentioned
    55 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    You are partly right. A larger frame has a larger sweetspot as well as a higher swingweight, which means more power. AOTBE, there is no way an oval racquet can have a larger sweetspot or more power than an iso.
    i only agree that a larger frame has larger sweetspot.

    a larger frame does not neccessarily means higher swing weight. that also depends on the density of the material. it is more fair to compare two identically weighted racket. given two identically weighted racket, the material density of the racket head will have to be lowered to compensate for the larger sized head. so swing weight will not vary that much.

    as for sweetspot vs power (or repulsion). that's a misconception. a larger sweetspot merely means a larger area near the center of the racket with simliar response. it has little to do with power/repulsion.

  2. #53
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Cannock, UK
    Posts
    2,908
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kwun
    i only agree that a larger frame has larger sweetspot.
    given the same string and tension

  3. #54
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Vancouver BC - Kirkland WA
    Posts
    654
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LazyBuddy
    True that! Also, be specify, say cab30ms!
    No no, it should be the Cab 20 classic!!! That's the cab's true heritage. You can still get them new in Japan. I know, I've got one myself.

  4. #55
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    New York, US
    Posts
    10,283
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 604badder
    No no, it should be the Cab 20 classic!!! That's the cab's true heritage. You can still get them new in Japan. I know, I've got one myself.
    I tried the original Cab20, but seems it's a bit too heavy for me (2u). With a weaker arm and no strength, I guess cab30ms (3u) does fit me better.

  5. #56
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The frame size is just one of four factors that have a bearing on swingweight. The other three are balance, weight, and length. A higher swingweight will give you more power, AOTBE. In racquet terms, an Iso is always more powerful than an Oval, courtesy of the higher swingweight, as well as a larger sweetspot, AOTBE.

  6. #57
    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
    A higher swingweight will give you more power, AOTBE. In racquet terms, an Iso is always more powerful than an Oval, courtesy of the higher swingweight, as well as a larger sweetspot, AOTBE.

    Incorrect. A higher swingweight doesnt mean more power. The disclaimer AOTBE is a copout, god doesnt pause and equalize the universe so that your statement may hold true. If yonex believe your concept, yonex would come out with GS7000 (GigaSpeed) using stainless steel for the frame.

    Iso shape wasnt designed for more power over cabs.
    Last edited by cooler; 03-08-2005 at 06:57 PM.

  7. #58
    Regular Member wilfredlgf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Malaysia
    Posts
    2,579
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler
    Iso shape wasnt designed for more power over cabs.
    It was designed to expand the size of the racquet sweetspot. Double-edged sword, this, at the expense of somewhat lower power - spread over a larger area.

    Doesn't quite explain why the Ti-10 kicks *toot* though.

  8. #59
    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 wilfredlgf
    It was designed to expand the size of the racquet sweetspot. Double-edged sword, this, at the expense of somewhat lower power - spread over a larger area.

    Doesn't quite explain why the Ti-10 kicks *toot* though.

    maybe because, just a guess, that 95% of your shot is off the dead center and therefore cab would feel weaker than an iso

  9. #60
    Administrator kwun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Santa Clara, California, United States
    Posts
    36,155
    Mentioned
    55 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    The frame size is just one of four factors that have a bearing on swingweight. The other three are balance, weight, and length. A higher swingweight will give you more power, AOTBE. In racquet terms, an Iso is always more powerful than an Oval, courtesy of the higher swingweight, as well as a larger sweetspot, AOTBE.
    i just want to re-iterate what i said in case taneepak has missed it:

    i only agree that a larger frame has larger sweetspot.

    a larger frame does not neccessarily means higher swing weight. that also depends on the density of the material. it is more fair to compare two identically weighted racket. given two identically weighted racket, the material density of the racket head will have to be lowered to compensate for the larger sized head. so swing weight will not vary that much.

    as for sweetspot vs power (or repulsion). that's a misconception. a larger sweetspot merely means a larger area near the center of the racket with simliar response. it has little to do with power/repulsion.

  10. #61
    Regular Member wilfredlgf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Malaysia
    Posts
    2,579
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kwun
    as for sweetspot vs power (or repulsion). that's a misconception. a larger sweetspot merely means a larger area near the center of the racket with simliar response. it has little to do with power/repulsion.
    Are you very sure about this? I'm no engineer but I think a lot will of us will be sitting on the fence for this one.

  11. #62
    Administrator kwun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Santa Clara, California, United States
    Posts
    36,155
    Mentioned
    55 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    The frame size is just one of four factors that have a bearing on swingweight. The other three are balance, weight, and length. A higher swingweight will give you more power, AOTBE. In racquet terms, an Iso is always more powerful than an Oval, courtesy of the higher swingweight, as well as a larger sweetspot, AOTBE.
    there is a contradiction there.

    the 4 factors:

    size, balance, weight, length. if you want to do a fair comparison, you must keep 3 factors constant and vary one of them.

    if you keep balance, weight, length constant, i don't see how the size of the frame can affect the swing weight.

    you have introduced an non-independent variable into the swingweight equation, and that is the size. thus causing the contradiction.

  12. #63
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Vancouver BC - Kirkland WA
    Posts
    654
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kwun
    there is a contradiction there.

    the 4 factors:

    size, balance, weight, length. if you want to do a fair comparison, you must keep 3 factors constant and vary one of them.

    if you keep balance, weight, length constant, i don't see how the size of the frame can affect the swing weight.

    you have introduced an non-independent variable into the swingweight equation, and that is the size. thus causing the contradiction.

    I hear you loud and clear Kwun, and you are right. You hit it right on the nail that tannepak's argument is changing multiple variables at the same time. It's not an analytical comparison in such a case. The argument about "swingweight" or the moment arm is moot. If all the other factors aren't held constant, there's nothing to compare.
    Last edited by 604badder; 03-08-2005 at 08:46 PM.

  13. #64
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If you keep the weight, balance and length constant, it would be interesting to compare an oval 4U against an iso 4U of the same brand racquet. 4U is chosen because of it's lighter weight, which will show up the difference better. Have you ever wondered why they don't make oval 4U racquets? The modern power game squeezes every gram of power and speed advantage. It is not without reason almost all top players use iso racquets, some even using 4U iso..

  14. #65
    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
    If you keep the weight, balance and length constant, it would be interesting to compare an oval 4U against an iso 4U of the same brand racquet. 4U is chosen because of it's lighter weight, which will show up the difference better. Have you ever wondered why they don't make oval 4U racquets? The modern power game squeezes every gram of power and speed advantage. It is not without reason almost all top players use iso racquets, some even using 4U iso..
    I still dont understand your beef

    - why almost all top players use iso?
    answer: yonex 'owns' most top players, and they chose their equips from the yonex' menu.

    - weak beginners need power more so than pros. Why do beginners prefer light rackets?

    - why they don't make oval 4U racquets?
    answer: they do. one brand come to mind is karakal. They make 4u, 5u AND 6u OVAL regular length racquets.

  15. #66
    Administrator kwun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Santa Clara, California, United States
    Posts
    36,155
    Mentioned
    55 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    the reason for no 4U oval racket from Yonex is two folds:

    1. Yonex has pretty much moved to isometric for the larger sweetspot. i must admit, to be able to hit the sweetspot more often is a good thing. but more for the good shot % instead of the power.

    2. 4U rackets are a relatively new movement by Yonex. by the time 4U rackets comes out, Yonex is no longer releasing any new racket development with ovals.

    furthermore, 4U oval rackets does exist. Karakal SL70 is an oval 4U ultralight racket. not from Yonex, but i already explained why Yonex doesn't have one.

    i agree a comparison would be helpful. but unfortunately it is not feasible as Yonex doesn't make a 4U oval. while Karakal doesn't make a 4U iso. to match all three factors, weight, balance and length will be a tough job.

    pro players are all leaning towards ultralight iso rackets because Yonex told them to. it is all marketing.

    having said that, a few still uses ovals despite the push by Yonex, Lee/Yoo (KOR), Tony Gunawan, Xia Xuanze, Shon Seung Mo are examples of recent oval users. but unfortunately, with the push of Yonex as well as retirement, soon all of them will leave the international scene or they will succumb to the marketing force of Yonex.

  16. #67
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    746
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Since moving to Yonex with Swing Power 900SX, I have used exclusively Isometric, but lately have tried a friends Carbonex 30MS and liked it.

    The other thing is I have stuck mostly with #U racquets for higher tensions, but have tried a few 4U + and found that I also like the lighter swing speed, for good control shots and nets, although technique has to be good for smash.

    Just seems generally Isometric is good for doubles, and Carbonex good for singles, but there are exceptions for every rule!?

    Noting with Internationals and Yonex marketing it seem to be Isometric in the main, with just the Koreans and a few sticking with Cab power.

  17. #68
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well, at least Thomas Laybourne thinks an iso (wide-body) is better because it can take higher tension and it produces more power than an oval like the Gosen 3500. You can click the Thomas Laybourne Forum, look for "Equipment Question", and then stroll down to thread #10.

Page 4 of 33 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Head heavy very stiff Oval Head racket ???
    By pussiii999 in forum Racket Recommendation / Comparison
    Replies: 17
    : 12-19-2008, 06:19 AM
  2. Square/Isometric or Oval/Traditional ?
    By eh7eh7 in forum Racket Recommendation / Comparison
    Replies: 1
    : 03-27-2006, 09:30 AM
  3. Oval head, isometric head and ovaliso head.
    By Extremesmash in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 5
    : 11-18-2004, 02:39 PM
  4. switching to oval from isometric head shape
    By Josh in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 4
    : 12-18-2001, 04:19 AM
  5. Isometric vs. Oval Head
    By Vy in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 14
    : 09-18-2001, 01:18 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
  •