** This simple question for underlying Basic grip Technique in terms of Power Vs Control Trade off related to HIGH STRING TENSION used by PROs / ELITE / Advanced level ** We all know that ‘almost all Pros’ at international level (true for National / club / advanced level also) use HIGH STRING TENTION to get better control while sacrificing on power (which they overcompensate using superior physical strength & fitness). Now WHY IS THAT ? * Please take it as fundamental thinking on different level .. WHY ? * I mean by all definitions they are Elite PROs .. Many years of multiple hours daily practice with excellent preparation and understanding of the game. So * Control * should be the last thing they need to THINK or OVERCOMPENATE by going above manufacturing limits up to 30/32/34 etc. So given choice at least “some if not all’ should go the other way around and lower the tension to stay within limit and get POWER AMPED Up using Trampolin effect at ‘relatively lower tension’ compare to high 30-34 string tension. Now is it possible they think given a choice between POWER VS CONTROL . .their forehand grip NEED HELP on CONTROL ? (despite years of practice & preparation with forehand grip?) SZ
Can you please stop making silly threads that go nowhere. Your other thread has already gone wild, dont spread the forums. Seems like you can't accept the fact that you're wrong and you're just drowning yourself
Stop this nonsense right now, this is just like the other stupid thread you made. Dont you think they know what they are doing?
@ #2 & #3 - Today being Sunday I will play nice and don't use Sarcasm. One has a choice to completly ignore post / threads they don't like (rather than replying). There are different persoectives and person who has ability to understand all perspective (for & against) and learn from it for over all developement will do better not only in Badminton but in general life. Please take moment to reflect and introspect where you want to be in this aspect. Not adding any value but posting borderline personal offensive reply will not be step in right direction at least you would learn valuable communication skills (written & verbal) which would be strenth in your professional work. good luck SZ
I have yet to see any pro over compensating for high tension with superior physical strength! If that's the case, I'd be smashing at 500kmh with my physique...
I am not convinced that "all power in the world is available" to all PROs and hence Control is the only EDGE they are looking for. That just's not make any sense from Equilibirium or Law of Averages point of view. If say .. some of all .. for example 2-3 out of 10 would have gone low string tension l ike 24/26 which many times are manufacturing limit on many rackets (compare to 30/32/34) etc ... It alreast there creditable observation that "some players think they got control but need EDGE in power so go the other way as compare to opponent who has more power but need control as EDGE". At least Law of Average observation ( few for power and few for control) would have made Basic grip usage as "Ultimum Execution Grip balancing on Power Vs Control. Which is been fine tuned further even at international circuit based on player to player. some need more power and some need more control in that situation. but not all can hit the shuttle with same power. few are known to be more power hitters than many others. Yet as of now 100% pros are going with High String Tensions .. only supports one inference .. which is "100% pros think they need more fine-tuning on control rather than Power as priority #1.. despite knowing more Power is winning formula. It means the current Basic grip is not optimally tuned for human body for control optimization as validated by 100% PROs. Just pointing out limitation on "control due to basic grip" at PRO level. it's a matter of time before alternative to Basic grip for advanced control could be found 9may it be Panhandle grip or other). As I aid earlier in other post the Basic grip was much more suitable for heavy rackets 20 years back (which is co-incidently aligned with Lon Tennis racket grip.) but then all were heavy rackets. and before somebody try to point out the ping-pong racket grip .. let's be clear the generation of "Heavy Spin" on ping pong ball mandate that grip rsther than weight of the racket. the spin is not that required in Badminton shuttle or Lon Tennis ball. So once again the question is open .. WHY do PRO use high Tension .. Not even one PRO is going for Trampolin like effect experiement (as 24/26 tension compare to 32/34). [MENTION=108229]Elisha[/MENTION] - it seems from your reply .. you are inferring that you could be that PRO player . so do you use high Tension and if yes WHY ? why not lower the tension and get more Power ?
first of all, do you know the real reason why advanced players use higher string tension? have you searched it on the forum yet? it is there and has been discussed umpteen times prior... just to save you some time, but you do need to search yourself... advanced players have faster racket speed, and so they hit the shuttle harder at impact... at which point the stringbed sinks and then rebounds to push out the shuttle it is exactly this stringbed rebound speed that must be matched to the player's racket speed, and the only way is to increase the tension for faster rebound speed to match faster racket speed
actually I did. It's always about Power Vs Control discussion consideration. By the way have you heard about "Low Repulsion" strings ? just asking
and you do realize that the whole point of an advanced player with a faster swing speed using a higher tension is so that the shuttle will leave his racket after strike much faster than at lower tension... that means the shuttle will travel to and end up at the opponent's side of the court faster so you see, it's not only about power vs control hope that also answers your question on low repulsion strings...
I disagree with a few of the things you have said in this post. I have kept a few of the main points. Trampoline effect: Firstly, lets talk about this. Your own inference is that lower tension is more power. This is true but only to a certain point. Otherwise you yourself would be using 10 lbs of tension, and advocating that professionals do the same. So, lets imagine a trampoline. If you push it down, it springs back into place. Now imagine a much tighter trampoline. If you pushed it down the same amount as the previous one, it would spring back into shape with more power, not less, because it is tighter. The difficulty is that it takes MORE energy to push down the tight trampoline. The same applies to strings - if you have the capability of making the strings bend enough. Remember strings can only bend so far before they break. Professionals have enough strength to bend the strings at a much higher tension than regular players e.g. 24lbs may be "maximum trampoline effect" for you and me, but 29lbs is "maximum trampoline effect" for a professional, so the ranges available to professionals is much higher than for us, because they have better timing, technique, and hence better power generation. Some players are more powerful than others: The reason for this is GENETICS. Some people have more fast twitch muscle fibres than others. That means some people are BUILT (from a genetic point of view) for explosive power (required for badminton) and others are BUILT for endurance. Think of Usain Bolt and Mo Farah. One is the perfect build for a short distance sprint, the other for long distance running. You could not coach Farah to compete with Bolt in a sprint (but you could improve his ability to sprint), and Bolt could never last as long as Farah in a run (but could improve his endurance). Thus, Cai Yun, who hits the shuttle regularly at 260 kph, MAY be able to get this speed to regularly 265ish if he changed strings to a lower tension, but could never hit the consistent 280/290 kph of his partner Fu Haifeng. The difference between 260 and 265 is negligible. "despite knowing more Power is winning formula": This phrase is just wrong. You left out the fact that the player must not lose any of their control. EVERY player knows that if they hit it hard and in the wrong place, the shot is useless. The ability to hit the correct line (i.e. aim at the racket hip, or in the tramlines) is the most important part of playing ANY shot. If you hit a big smash at your opponents racket, then it was pointless. The winning formula is power+control. But ALL professional players have plenty of power, and ALL professional players have plenty of control. But you cannot change someones strings to turn a player with a good powerful smash into a player with an awesomely powerful smash (unless they develop some crazy new technology for strings and rackets in the future). However, it is VERY important for players to be able to put good pace onto their shots. If a player cannot hit the shuttle hard enough to be threatening, then they are not going to be effective. And this power is determined by their technique and their genetic makeup. Not their strings. So, given that they cannot gain power from their strings, but can gain extra control without sacrificing much power, that is what they do. They have not done this to make up for poor technique (lack of control for basic grip?) as you seem to suggest. Looking for an EDGE: You talk a lot about "looking for an edge" and claim that the basic grip has not naturally got enough control and these players must in some way overcompensate by using different strings. If this were really the case as you suggest, why do all players not use 40lbs tension? Some players do. I think your train of thought is way off the mark, and a different analogy is needed. It is more about using the best tool for the job. If you can increase your control without much compromise in terms of power, then that may be suitable for you. Some players will not like the compromise and will stick to lower tensions. Others will not. Those players at 30lbs are close to their power optimum in my opinion, whilst those at 35lbs are further away. Closing thoughts: At the end of the day, players choose their strings based on how it makes them feel. They are not thinking, "I need more power so I should change my strings", or "my technique isn't good so I should change my tension". They are focussed entirely on whether they feel comfortable on the court. Does the shuttle react off the strings the way they want? They do not pick a tension based on the "properties" of that string tension, they pick it based on how they want their shots to feel. You claim that professionals are not experimenting with tensions. How do you know? They spend all their time training, may they change their tensions during training until they find what they want, and then stick to that? I will also add that some commentators, including Gillian Clark, claim that higher strings gives MORE power and LESS control. These guys are ex professionals, and obviously know a thing or two about badminton. Just to add a spanner to all of everybodys arguments I do not think it is a surprise that players use higher tensions if it suits their game - I think it is only natural. Any thoughts or comments welcome
A bit more on string tension: There are two factors that go into improved control from a string bed (that I will talk about here). One is contact time, the other is 'reflective' property. Taken in isolation, the longer the shuttle is in contact with the string bed, the more control you have. Taken in isolation, the less the shuttle trajectory from the string bed is dependant on the location of the point of impact, the more control you have. Unfortunately, increasing control by changing one of the above will inevitable decrease control via the other. e.g. Decrease string tension so that the shuttle is held longer. But now the 'sweet spot' is enlarged - at a cost - the direction of the bird is different depending on where about you hit. Conversely, increasing the string tension will make shuttle fly off the racket at much more uniform angle for a given shot, but the contact time is reduced (and sweet spot is smaller).
I think is it’s safe to say with all other discussions going on (or had in the past many times) as well as conventional wisdom that : For each player the Optimum Balancing act of Power + Control is different based on M (Mass) and V (Swing Speed) where M & V used in P = MV or ½ MV**2 or F = M * A sort of fundamental physical equations (Take your pick). In plain English - Each player has different optimum point for Racket Weight and related Swing speed (Feel). Now the way adjustments related to Rackets works to suit each player optimum balancing of M & V 1. Racket Weight ( 2U / 3U/ 4U / 5U ) as high level adjustments Based one 1 “boundary” the next level adjustment is 2. Headlite / Even Balance / Head heavy Racket Based 2 ( which is based 1) “boundry”, the next level adjustment is 3. String tension of Racket ( Low is 18 to 21, Medium is 21 to 24, high is 24-28, Very high is 28-34 etc) Based on 3 ( based on 2 .. Based on 1), the next level adjustments is 4. String elasticity (High / Med / Low Repultion) ** May be 3 & 4 ( String Tension & Elasticity could be toggled in adjustment priority ). Now this is where I think I don’t buy the argument (as compelling it may look on face value) which is “it is exactly this string-bed rebound speed that must be matched to the player's racket speed, and the only way is to increase the tension for faster rebound speed to match faster racket speed” If the Racket speed (Swing speed is faster) despite reaching to 3 or 4[SUP]th[/SUP] level adjustment layer .. in this example having say 26 lb tension with “low repulsion string” and still due to FASTER RACKET SPEED it needs to go on 34 lb than may be level 1 or 2 needs to adjust first in terms of Racket weight / Weight balance. So in short this claim has lot of “Internal contradictions”. If the swing speed is that fast than the player might as well UPGRADE to more weight for more favorable output. We all know based on similar to Equilibrium concept : When all other parameters are equal and only change to one or two parameter … the change of that parameters impact would be net surplus impact on baseline output. English translation : Keeping all other parameters same, having more weight of racket ( 1 & 2 above as major adjustment ) and reducing and matching minor adjustments) “racket swing-speed to string rebound speed for LOW tension like 26 J will give more Power”. Yet we do not see that trend. So the “high swing-speed matching String rebound at high tension” observation does not seem very logical. It just comes back to pure simple concept as “More Tension means more Control”. Please read my previous post one more time .. I have used Law of average concept where in a perfect optimum grip ... Few players have gone for low 24/26 J tension and few may have gone for 34/36 to extract individual benefit for Power + Control tuning purpose. Unfortunately nobody is doing that and hence “Control” with high tension seems like trend which means … well you know the answer it is interesting but I do see #8 & #10 are saying high tension meant for more power (Rebound speed?) where as #12 is saying more Control (trading off between two types of control) and #11 is based on Power+Control equation but saying high tension meant for more Control as Power is not maximized after certain point .. Blame Genetics I can see the differences of understanding and justification between #8/10/11/12 : from the pros of basic grip. May be it’s very complicated subject but when there is NO consistency among experts J than a no wonder a newbie like me will get confused on this anamoly SZ
Disagree with a lot of this. Actually, post #8 and #10 are explaining why professionals should be using tensions higher than the ones you are suggesting. He is explaining exactly what is further explained in post #11 that maximum power at higher swing speeds only comes from from higher tensions. He has not mentioned power and control, but is explaining why professionals should be using tensions higher than your suggested 24/26. So #8 and #10 are NOT trying to explain that higher string tension = more power. He is saying that the tension should changed based on the players overall skill, with a higher band of tensions (i.e. instead of 23 - 29lbs it should be 28 - 34lbs which is considered) giving better results. Based on this, I think you will find that all of the posts are explaining the same thing - players play with what they like, faster swing speeds tends to suit faster tensions, and it is generally accepted that higher tension gives control. So there IS consistency, but I feel you have misunderstood the posts. I explained in #11 that your comment "few are known to be more power hitters than many others" is down to genetics, not string tensions, and hence why what you said was irrelevant to the discussion. The point is that string tension will not transform players into something they are not, and that I personally believe the changes that could be made due to tension are not significant enough to alter the players power levels significantly. I DO agree that changing tension will alter the power levels slightly, but not by what I consider to be a large amount. As I explained in my post (and you have not addressed this that I can see), players choose their tension based on how the racket plays and feels, and for no other reason - the go with what they like! And they know what they like because of years of training (where what they like will change), not because "everybody says to use a high tension". This preference for how the string feels also depends a lot (as you have said) on the racket they use. Telling a player to start using a different weight of racket (head light/heavy etc) doesn't make any sense, because players PREFER certain weights. I, for example, enjoy the feeling of a head heavy racket, but do not enjoy playing with a head light racket as much. If I were a better net player however, maybe I would prefer a head light racket. Racket and string choice is completely personal - people play with what they like! In short, you have misunderstood posts from visor, and are hence come to the conclusion that we are all contradicting each other. I also feel you failed failed to address many of the points raised in post #11, and I would appreciate it if you could give me your thoughts. In particular: why genetics does not factor into your argument anywhere? How do you know top players have not experimented with tensions and decided to use what they like? Why you think that players are using strings that they "shouldn't" be using? Your thoughts on why I disagree with your views on "looking for an edge" and power being a "winning formula"? Looking forward to your responses
I agree 100% with you except Genetics where I have "soft" agreement with you RECAP of few bullet points based agreement on excellent posts by you as well as by amleto & visor A-1) "More Tension is more Control" - Agree A-2) Players go by Play / Feel of Racket - Agree (they don't look for physics equations on paper) A-3) Player prefer certain weight of racket (and balance point) - Agree (once again their mind & body makes "subconcious decision" about M (weight) and V (Swing-speed) at optimum level trade-off - Agree A-4) International players are very smart .. they have support structure in place ... they have lot of experimentation with racket weight & racket tension before they have outing in competetive tournamanents - Agree Now let me add 2 from my side on high level A-5) The Racket weight is inversly responsible to Racket swing speed while keeping all parameters same (means same player, same skills/technique etc) - Agree ? ( I hope so) A-6) More racket weight to utilize given all other paramters are equal (except swing speed reduction parameter) will generate more Power - Agree ? (I hope so) now assuming you guys agree with A-5 & A-6 .... look at all the agreement and data points one more time on fundamental level. Add the "Law of Average" observations and the only logical conclusion is coming out of this trend is as you ask excellent question and refer to my thread as Anamoly is "Why you think that players are using strings that they "shouldn't" be using" - The basic grip is not giving them the natural control in alignment with natural body mechnics .. which was invented 30-40 years back to handle "Heavy" rackets using Pronation / Supination. it means Basic grip is not 'fundamentally suitable for control' (suppoerted by beginners without instructions to opt for Panhandle grip) and based on A-1 to A-6 where PROS could do trade-off by more weight in racket and yet not doing it. since they are PROs with the EDGE they are looking for it and yet nobody is willing to trade-off on Power side ... it just proves further SZ
Correct answer +1 Also shorter contact time makes opponent harder to predict your shots. And high tension = higher max power. "low tension for power & high tension for control" rule only applies when you max power is low. With high power, you will need high tension to utilize you power better.
yep... borrowing from an analogy in archery, if you're strong you can use either low or high tension bowstring... but you'll get more max power from the higher tension one
A little bit digression from Topic but here is quick answer. I don't use Basic grip at all as I think using "narrower parallel side (1)" of badminton racket octogone is not efficient way of energy transfer or control. I use Panhandle grip "using Wider parallel side (3)" of badminton racket octogone. I use "modified bevel grip (if i may call it)" but bringing in thump on lower wide parallet side for backhand overhead. the racket grip moves between (minor adjustments) this two grips based on my "feel while hitting shuttle" so I also changed grip but it's more in Panhandle grip base changed. now back to topic discussion. A-1 to A-6 is given any enlightment of this anamoly is welcome @#17 - Read A-1 to A-6 and previous post carefully. The so called "Max Power" person could afford to go for more heavier racket to get more power .. that is the point because u know what he has "more power to swing heavy heavy racket". 1) It's like 4U Racket at 34 lb tension for matching with "Very HIGH Swing Speed" OR 2) 3U Racket at 26 lb tension with "High Swing speed" Which one will generate more Power (assuming all other parameters are SAME .. ie same player / Same Skills / same body strength etc) ? SZ
The player that doesn't use panhandle (and uses 3U with 34lbs) Seriously, it should be bio-mechanically impossible to reach your max swingspeed using panhandle (the basis of your "theory". There are countless studies on pronation maybe you should read a few first (I suggest javelin for example). Panhandle in tennis service is called a pancake serve [video=youtube;EgmNag6Ebyw]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EgmNag6Ebyw[/video] [video=youtube;_Z0uBItsSJI]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_Z0uBItsSJI[/video]
