Thread: Recommended String and String Tension for Li Ning Lin Dan Woods N90-2

1. Recommended String and String Tension for Li Ning Lin Dan Woods N90-2

what string and string tension would u recommend for me? i am looking for power and i want my smashes to be harder

2. Any racquet is the same lower tension of more power but not so much that it's loose, I personally suggest around 22

3. Originally Posted by Lordofthefart
Any racquet is the same lower tension of more power but not so much that it's loose, I personally suggest around 22
I'm sorry but first the sentence is hard to understand but you seem to be saying that lower tension produces more power which is incorrect.

Higher tensions have the potential to create more power but you need to have the swing speed to take advantage of it.

4. whats your opinion on bg 80 with 26 lbs tension?

5. Originally Posted by chouchouftw
whats your opinion on bg 80 with 26 lbs tension?
You need to provide more information... level of play, singles/doubles, previous string and tensions... etc.

6. Originally Posted by druss
Higher tensions have the potential to create more power but you need to have the swing speed to take advantage of it.
uh no I’ve strung into my triple digits of racquets for many people and I’m saying that's not the case, if you saying that a higher swing speed will give you more power that's like saying badminton shoes are better for badminton than flip flops, if you speed your swing up then you can hit with more force it's as simple case of f=ma and not a matter of your equipment.

The way you measure "power" is through repulsion, I would like to use the analogy of a trampoline vs. a brick wall. Which has the greater repulsion power? Obviously if you hit an object with the brick wall faster it would have greater repulsion but that's not the general case. In fact the power to tension ratio is a parabola. That is to say that there is a local max of power and drop offs at both ends. To bring it back to my analogy of the trampoline vs. brick wall, a loose piece of fabric has little to no repulsion, likewise to string tension, no tension means it isn’t going to hit with much repulsion.

7. Originally Posted by Lordofthefart
uh no I’ve strung into my triple digits of racquets for many people and I’m saying that's not the case, if you saying that a higher swing speed will give you more power that's like saying badminton shoes are better for badminton than flip flops, if you speed your swing up then you can hit with more force it's as simple case of f=ma and not a matter of your equipment.

The way you measure "power" is through repulsion, I would like to use the analogy of a trampoline vs. a brick wall. Which has the greater repulsion power? Obviously if you hit an object with the brick wall faster it would have greater repulsion but that's not the general case. In fact the power to tension ratio is a parabola. That is to say that there is a local max of power and drop offs at both ends. To bring it back to my analogy of the trampoline vs. brick wall, a loose piece of fabric has little to no repulsion, likewise to string tension, no tension means it isn’t going to hit with much repulsion.
First of all... I do believe that badminton shoes are better for you than flip flops... because yes, higher swing speeds do give more power, I'm sure that's obvious to everyone...

I'm also a stringer and have played badminton, including competitive for 20 years. I've played with and against some of the best players in Canada (at that time).

The analogy of a trampoline to a brick wall is a stupid one, how about we try the analogy of a trampoline with a loose weave vs one with a tight weave (yes there are different weaves)... that makes more sense doesn't it?

Of course there is an upper and a lower limit but since most people aren't even considering over 30 lbs (except for pros or some slightly unbalanced players) my analogy stands. I easily generate more power at 25-26 lbs than I do with 22 lbs, if you say different then I'm sorry but I think you might have to re-evaluate...

As a note, the reason I used the word "potential" is in relation to potential energy, perhaps you could do some searching on the potential energy of springs, since there isn't much written about string beds, and you might learn something new.

8. Originally Posted by druss
First of all... I do believe that badminton shoes are better for you than flip flops... because yes, higher swing speeds do give more power, I'm sure that's obvious to everyone...

I'm also a stringer and have played badminton, including competitive for 20 years. I've played with and against some of the best players in Canada (at that time).

The analogy of a trampoline to a brick wall is a stupid one, how about we try the analogy of a trampoline with a loose weave vs one with a tight weave (yes there are different weaves)... that makes more sense doesn't it?

Of course there is an upper and a lower limit but since most people aren't even considering over 30 lbs (except for pros or some slightly unbalanced players) my analogy stands. I easily generate more power at 25-26 lbs than I do with 22 lbs, if you say different then I'm sorry but I think you might have to re-evaluate...

As a note, the reason I used the word "potential" is in relation to potential energy, perhaps you could do some searching on the potential energy of springs, since there isn't much written about string beds, and you might learn something new.
I fail to see how your argument counters mine. I believe it supports mine more than anything else. I clearly state that too loose of a tension will not have any power. Furthermore I'm sure with your engineering degree that you understand that to do any experiment you only change one variable at a time. So do not confuse a swing speed with tension. Those are two separate variables and although they are related it is not a causation relationship. They have a correlation between each variable and the “power” of your stroke.
Furthermore you invalidate your argument by saying you played as one of the best with the best. I say this because I would like to believe you are quiet skilled and thus have a well-honed smash. If that is truly the case, you do not represent the lay person playing badminton. Although I will not claim that I have seen as many years as you playing badminton have I have worked in many different levels of play to observe and to understand. Most people do not have the velocity in the swing needed to generate power with tensions above the recommended window. I do not believe if you say that you have such credentials that you can apply your own standards on a lay person.
I would like to ask that you elaborate on how the trampoline is a stupid analogy. I got that analogy from a certified master racquet technician. And I see the merit in his analogy. I believe you are trying to produce a counter argument by extrapolation different trampolines but I’m comparing the trampoline to a brick wall. I believe any trampoline of any weave will have more bounce than a brick wall. I do not want to counter a point that I do not fully understand so I will politely ask that you elaborate before accusing something that is said to be stupid.
Could you explain how potential energy plays into this? I believe that I have quiet thoroughly explained my scientific concepts so that even a non-science person would understand. Speaking form a science point of view, potential energy and kinetic energy of springs have a wide range of topics that I’m not too certain that you’ve narrowed down. I believe you are referring to the concept from Robert Hooke also known as Hooke’s Law. Please confirm if this is what you are talking about since your post is not specific enough to understand prima facie. “Higher tensions have the potential to create more power but you need to have the swing speed to take advantage of it.” It still makes no sense in the context of your post. I mean you haven’t addressed my alternating variable argument and I don’t see how reading it as potential energy changes the statement.
Lastly I fail to see how you must say that I need to re-evaluate. I have posted an argument that you have not countered. Because you make a point that has little relevance to my point does not mean you have countered my point. You need to provide a flaw in logic, find error in my establishment of facts, or error in my conclusion of the facts to be considered as a counter point. All you did was post about yourself and as the above states, does not full fill any the above. I am more than willing to concede the argument if you can prove me wrong. If you say I have something to learn that is true, I do not know everything there is to stringing since I’m sure there are things to be learned. But you should give me an example of something I don’t already know and I believed that I’ve done my homework on this matter and investigated quiet thoroughly with an n>1.

9. Sorry for the long post, but I felt it necessary to explain myself in greater detail.

10. Sorry, but I feel no need to validate my argument to you at all, please see my comments in the "thermodynamics" thread.

BTW, are you trying to tell me to be "quiet" or do you actually mean "quite"? The proper use of sentance structure and paragraphs would also help your case.

11. Originally Posted by druss
Sorry, but I feel no need to validate my argument to you at all, please see my comments in the "thermodynamics" thread.

BTW, are you trying to tell me to be "quiet" or do you actually mean "quite"? The proper use of sentance structure and paragraphs would also help your case.

I didn't say you need to validate and I am furthering a discussion and that's it. I am putting forth an argument and you are attacking my grammar. I have overlooked your grammar to discuss the ideas of your posts. If you wish to discuss grammar I would be willing under another thread in the chit-chat forum. I post articles online because I do not believe that if I say something on a forum that it becomes fact. Neither do I believe that that citing my study and credentials is proof of what I am saying. I am doing my best to be polite to someone that has insulted my intelligence on several occasions. I have tried to stay within the realm of the discussion and have discussed only what you have posted yourself. The extent of your point has been to accuse me of not knowing what I am saying, not following my basis of logic and then insulting me.

Please understand that I have not been offensive in the least nor have the intentions of attacking your person. I have only presented another point of view and have backed it with evidence. If you feel that walking out on a conversation is the best course of action than I respect that. You have the unalienable right to stop posting and I have also done my best to excuse your exceptionally rude comments towards myself.

I have only followed the scientific principle of falsification. As I have stated, I present a point of view to be discussed in this “market place of ideas.” I do make grand statements and I have kept it as factual and non-opinionated as possible. The fact that every individual has a bias in their interpretation is a given.

I do not feel you need to justify yourself to me on any degree. I apologise to the one who started the thread since this has little relevance to the thread itself. But I feel I must now defend my own integrate and defamation of my character.

12. I feel I get more power from 28lbs, than 22lbs, all things being equal. So if you can handle it, the higher tension will give you better playability, but if you can't handle it, all you will end up with when playing with high tension is injuries. So beginers playing with high tension just won't work.

13. Originally Posted by LD rules!
I feel I get more power from 28lbs, than 22lbs, all things being equal. So if you can handle it, the higher tension will give you better playability, but if you can't handle it, all you will end up with when playing with high tension is injuries. So beginers playing with high tension just won't work.
True that, better worded than my post at #8

14. Originally Posted by Lordofthefart
I fail to see how your argument counters mine. I believe it supports mine more than anything else. I clearly state that too loose of a tension will not have any power. Furthermore I'm sure with your engineering degree that you understand that to do any experiment you only change one variable at a time. So do not confuse a swing speed with tension. Those are two separate variables and although they are related it is not a causation relationship. They have a correlation between each variable and the “power” of your stroke.
Furthermore you invalidate your argument by saying you played as one of the best with the best. I say this because I would like to believe you are quiet skilled and thus have a well-honed smash. If that is truly the case, you do not represent the lay person playing badminton. Although I will not claim that I have seen as many years as you playing badminton have I have worked in many different levels of play to observe and to understand. Most people do not have the velocity in the swing needed to generate power with tensions above the recommended window. I do not believe if you say that you have such credentials that you can apply your own standards on a lay person.
I would like to ask that you elaborate on how the trampoline is a stupid analogy. I got that analogy from a certified master racquet technician. And I see the merit in his analogy. I believe you are trying to produce a counter argument by extrapolation different trampolines but I’m comparing the trampoline to a brick wall. I believe any trampoline of any weave will have more bounce than a brick wall. I do not want to counter a point that I do not fully understand so I will politely ask that you elaborate before accusing something that is said to be stupid.
Could you explain how potential energy plays into this? I believe that I have quiet thoroughly explained my scientific concepts so that even a non-science person would understand. Speaking form a science point of view, potential energy and kinetic energy of springs have a wide range of topics that I’m not too certain that you’ve narrowed down. I believe you are referring to the concept from Robert Hooke also known as Hooke’s Law. Please confirm if this is what you are talking about since your post is not specific enough to understand prima facie. “Higher tensions have the potential to create more power but you need to have the swing speed to take advantage of it.” It still makes no sense in the context of your post. I mean you haven’t addressed my alternating variable argument and I don’t see how reading it as potential energy changes the statement.
Lastly I fail to see how you must say that I need to re-evaluate. I have posted an argument that you have not countered. Because you make a point that has little relevance to my point does not mean you have countered my point. You need to provide a flaw in logic, find error in my establishment of facts, or error in my conclusion of the facts to be considered as a counter point. All you did was post about yourself and as the above states, does not full fill any the above. I am more than willing to concede the argument if you can prove me wrong. If you say I have something to learn that is true, I do not know everything there is to stringing since I’m sure there are things to be learned. But you should give me an example of something I don’t already know and I believed that I’ve done my homework on this matter and investigated quiet thoroughly with an n>1.
Dude ... you should be/must be a lawyer or something LOL

Sorry to bring this thread off topic again but I need to clarify something since it's confusing the heck out of me right now

I like to say that I can generate more power from a smash with 29lbs vs 22lbs of tension (same string,pattern etc ...).

So if this is true, then doesn't that mean stiffer string bed = more repulsion providing the fact that I have enough force to stretch the string bed to generate optimal repulsion (parabola)

So now how would you explain that I'm getting more power at a higher tension? I just want to get a better knowledge of how tension can/cannot change the amount of power that you're generating.

To my understanding till now is, you have to have the required stength/force to get more power from a higher tension. If you're not generating enough power, higher tension is worse cause you can't even stretch the string bed enough to generate the power compared to a lower tension.

I hope you guys can understand what I just wrote. I feel like I'm just babbling away

15. easy guys,

In simple term ... a player with fast swing can generate as much power at higher tension (i.e. > 26lbs ) than when the racket is strung at a lower tension (i.e. 22lbs) . One of the main advantage those players with higher swing speed to string at higher tension is to reduce some of the unwanted trampoline effect (diffused wave-thats why you dont get that crisp sound at a lower tension) that affect the accuracy of the shot , and thus higher string tension increases the accuracy of their power shots , more control for their big smash .

wow, I can see some of you stringing it to 28-29lbs here......that would be impressive if you can generate power with that kind of tension.

16. A tighter tension or spring will have more stored potential energy from the shuttle making it deform.

Let's try another analogy, a bow. We have a weak, single piece wood bow with low tension string and a strong, composite bow with high tension string, now we have a teen boy and a strong man. The strong man can easily bend the weak bow back and stretch the string to its maximum but all that means is he is going to shoot to the maximum distance of the weak bow which is not very much. The teen boy could do the exact same and get the same distance. Now we take a strong bow with high tension string, the teen boy cannot bend this bow to the maximum and therefore he would get more distance from the weak bow but.... the strong man can bend the bow and get twice the distance he can from the weak bow. This analogy is even better than any other one (it's also one I've used before) because it's a system of bow plus string, just like our rackets and string.

For the "spring" analogy, it's simple, a strong spring vs a weak spring. One takes a lot of force to compress and the weak one takes little force to compress. If you have the force (swing speed) the strong spring will have more stored (potential) energy than the weak spring. If you aren't strong enough to compress the strong spring then you will get less power from it. When the strong spring uncoils it changes that high stored potential energy to high kinetic energy.

The comment that each person has an optimum range is true, the statement that lower tension gives more power as an absolute for all players is false. The analogy of a trampoline vs a brick wall is stupid because it's not one or the other (not black and white but a whole range of greys), there is a RANGE of tensions available and the optimum tension for power is going to be different for each person but generally speaking, within their optimum range, the higher the tension, the more potential for power.

As a final note, I suggest you stop googling and then spouting key terms such as hooks law as it does not help your case (as I've already stated in the other thread). Anyone can do a google search but without the underlying understanding of the mechanics of WHY things happen the way they do you're not able to make a convincing argument. If you're wondering why I'm not responding directly to your posts it's because you're on my ignore list. I have two kids and a challenging job, my patience is worn out between the two and I have none left for those who insist on trying to prove something they have no real understanding of.

17. Originally Posted by druss
A tighter tension or spring will have more stored potential energy from the shuttle making it deform.

Let's try another analogy, a bow. We have a weak, single piece wood bow with low tension string and a strong, composite bow with high tension string, now we have a teen boy and a strong man. The strong man can easily bend the weak bow back and stretch the string to its maximum but all that means is he is going to shoot to the maximum distance of the weak bow which is not very much. The teen boy could do the exact same and get the same distance. Now we take a strong bow with high tension string, the teen boy cannot bend this bow to the maximum and therefore he would get more distance from the weak bow but.... the strong man can bend the bow and get twice the distance he can from the weak bow. This analogy is even better than any other one (it's also one I've used before) because it's a system of bow plus string, just like our rackets and string.

For the "spring" analogy, it's simple, a strong spring vs a weak spring. One takes a lot of force to compress and the weak one takes little force to compress. If you have the force (swing speed) the strong spring will have more stored (potential) energy than the weak spring. If you aren't strong enough to compress the strong spring then you will get less power from it. When the strong spring uncoils it changes that high stored potential energy to high kinetic energy.

The comment that each person has an optimum range is true, the statement that lower tension gives more power as an absolute for all players is false. The analogy of a trampoline vs a brick wall is stupid because it's not one or the other (not black and white but a whole range of greys), there is a RANGE of tensions available and the optimum tension for power is going to be different for each person but generally speaking, within their optimum range, the higher the tension, the more potential for power.
You are correct on most parts. Although one thing which I notice that is constantly being left out is the fact that the racquet shaft also flexes along with the string bed.

Following your bow analogy, when you pull back on the bow, not only will the string bend but so does the ends of the bow. Potential energy is also stored in these parts and this will contribute to the snap back of the bow and string in launching the arrow.

Coming back to the racquet, when you flex your arm to hit a shot, in the immediate instant before the string bed stretches the shaft will flex in the opposite direction first as the string bed comes into contact with the shuttle. Also after the string bed reforms back into shape and before the shuttle is launched from the racquet, the shaft will flex forwards and the potential energy stored in there will also be transferred into launching the shuttle.

When people talk about "having the strength to play at this high tension", the strength is also put into the flexing of the racquet shaft this way. One fact I will point out is the existence of soft to medium flex racquets meant for beginners who do not have much arm strength.

Think of it this way now, if only the tension and stretchability of the string bed is the only factor affecting the playability then why are racquet manufacturers producing these soft to medium flex racquets and marketing them as such? Why is it that ALL RACQUETS are not produced with the same flex and then have them marketed to the individual level groups based solely on the string type and tension only? Lastly why are the manufacturers obsessed with designing shafts with different stiffness levels ranging from flexible to extra stiff?

If you watch the professional players play (using those 30+ pounds of high string tension) and hit smashes, have you ever noticed how the racquet shaft is flexing during the shot?

The high string tension low string tension factor does not affect badminton racquets as much as tennis racquets which is what a lot of people constantly misunderstand. Tennis racquets don't flex like badminton racquets although I think Yonex is currently producing tennis racquets that flex slightly to improve control for the player.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 Last

Posting Permissions

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