Results 460 to 476 of 946
05-05-2013, 03:59 PM #460
The problem here is that it's hard to find the ideal racket on the first try. Ideally one should try a variety of rackets with strings strung at different tensions to get an idea of what will suit them. Unfortunately this does cost a bit of money.
Now I'm not claiming that this racket is more powerful than a VT-ZF, or that it's the best racket ever and that everyone should use it. But for me, and many others, it was powerful enough to justify making the trade off of a little power to much more maneuverability. I get much more power from that racket than many 3U rackets.
Keep in mind that we don't know exactly how everything works in regards of rackets vs power vs control, etc. So you can try to justify with weight/flex/wt/etc being incorrect, but as long as you don't know the complete equation, it'll never be accurate.
Also, saying that pros are losing because of the racket is pretty mindless... If they didn't like the racket, they'd use another one. If Yonex wouldn't allow them to use another one (I'm pretty sure that'd be the dumbest move ever), they'd do like usual and play with repaints.
05-05-2013, 04:05 PM #461
05-05-2013, 05:09 PM #462
For guys like LCW and LD, head weight is important - clears get easier, smashes have more power (in their case), the racket swings more stable - all helpful aspects in singles. They have the strength and technique to make it work in defense and quick exchanges as well, which less skilled players or pros with a different style might not be able to.
Others will prefer lighter rackets as the Arcsaber 10 for singles as it's lighter weight allows for more deceptive net play and better defense...
I didn't say everyone should go for heavy rackets. I, for example, have been using the Bs09/12 for the past season. It's on the light spectrum, sure, but it suited my needs. Still it's well into 3U territory, and not head light, so it's a powerhouse compared to the Arc FB.
I'm also not saying that no one should use the Arc FB. I'm saying an advanced competition player will definitely play better with other rackets.
I had a lot of fun playing with the FB, actually. It's really great what you can do with it defensively and in terms of deception, and in recreational doubles it's a delight. I get only limited use out of it in serious training though as it cripples my attacking game from the back. Front court play and defense are (mostly) enhanced, but once I'm at the back, the attack is pretty much lost as I have to play a clear after a couple weak smashes (to avoid my opponents counter-attacking the smash as they creep forward in their defensive position).
05-05-2013, 05:32 PM #463
I'm an advanced player and I like the racket a lot. I also know some really good players (top regional players/national players) that like the racket better than any other rackets they have tried in the current lines.
I think you'd make it easier for other people to agree with you if you removed the "only bad players like this racket"* parts. Some advanced players can definitely prefer this racket over everything else.
*I know that's not exactly what you said and probably not what you think, but that's what it comes across as.
soulsync liked this post
05-05-2013, 05:39 PM #464
Haha, yeah - let me try to rephrase that
I think that while some advanced players might like this racket the best, prefer it to any other model out there, objectively they play a bit worse. For me, there's a similar problem - I like my strings tighter than I play the best with. I like the feeling, the sharp impact, and the control - but objectively I play better with 1-2lbs softer strings than I usually train with.
As I said, I liked the racket as well, and I'm not a bad player, but for me it was pretty clear I wasn't at my best with it. For others, the difference might be much smaller, but I'm convinced it's still there
I sometimes play with a lighter, tighter strung racket than my Bs09. In some matches, I think there's actually very little difference in power, and then a couple rallies later, I can't get through or eventually get countered in situations I would've made the point with my Bs09....that is usually my somewhat objective indication I'm worse in that aspect. Same when I'm playing with a heavier racket and suddenly don't get back shots I normally would've whipped crosscourt.
PS: #462 should've said "...being intentionally..."
Last edited by j4ckie; 05-05-2013 at 05:45 PM.
05-05-2013, 06:26 PM #465
The initial feeling of the light FB rackets do bring extra joy, mainly because it is unique, but from the All England 2013 MD results, there is reasons why MD players switch away from the FB.
For what ever reason i dont know,
P.S. lots of broken FB rackets images in the BC
05-05-2013, 06:54 PM #466
could the reason be mailny for marketing purpose
05-06-2013, 01:55 AM #467
05-06-2013, 01:57 AM #468
05-06-2013, 02:05 AM #469
I spent another 1.5 hours playing with the FB today. I stand by what I had said earlier about the FB. It's a good racket, but the weaknesses as mentioned before in this thread still stands. This definitely isn't the perfect racket so let's get that out of the way. None is. As stated before, this racket really shine in the front to mid-court areas. I don't doubt that. In fact, I dominated in the front to mid-court areas today.
I still think I can squeeze a bit more performance out of this racket. As stated before, this FB isn't mine. I'm going to buy one later this week and will post more impressions of it later.
05-06-2013, 02:13 AM #470
Last edited by visor; 05-06-2013 at 02:16 AM.
05-06-2013, 02:31 AM #471
05-06-2013, 02:39 AM #472
05-06-2013, 03:09 AM #473
05-06-2013, 06:46 AM #474
Nowhere did I state that everyone should go for the heaviest racket available. For both LCW and LD, heavy & head heavy rackets work out the best. Chen Long, for example, plays a less head heavy racket but enjoys a lot of success with that. My opinion has always been that there is a limited range of weight (or rather, swing weight) that is still useful for badminton. An individual player's preferred range is much narrower than that, I don't think I'm using the "ideal racket" or such nonsense.
Reading in excerpts is the best way to get a warped view of the intended message. Read my comments in full or don't reply to them, pls.
05-07-2013, 11:35 AM #475
As a end user of 2 FBs, allow me my cents worth. I have played 2 months with the FB as my primary racket, and to a certain extent, I kinda agree that smashes are not as effective...I think I have kind of gotten used to the FB, and since smashes are not my primary playing style, I think it is a good trade off in return for controlled play and defense.
However, I must admit that the racket is pretty frail...cuz I broke my FB for the second time due to a mishit..the frame cracked at the 11oclock position...quite similar to the previous breakage. String was bg66um strung at 24lbs...gonna make a trip down to queensway tomorrow, fingers crossed that the warranty claim will be fuss free...
visor liked this post
05-07-2013, 11:59 AM #476
Does anyone have a comparison of the FB and the Victor Light Fighter 7400?
The Victor is heavier, but possibly the closest competitor from Victor?