Having read a number of threads on CN racket designation I was wondering if any low-end CN rackets existed? If they did exist, then it would discount a lot of the theories that are floating around. Also, according to Luxis Sports, CN/CP are especially selected rather than especially produced. But this makes me wonder how someone can actually determine which rackets are superior. I suppose they could choose a racket that had exactly the right balance and flexibility, but what else? Swinging the racket would be too subjective and anything more technical would be prohibitive in terms of cost. I think we should really find out about CN rackets. It seems trivial, but it's nice to have full confidence that what you're using is the best available. Can't we get more opinions from those who own CN rackets and do a bit more blind testing?
Not, if the only difference is the price or if the CN ones are on the wrong side of the difference scale.
I have the CN rackets as follows: Cab 8 dx CN Iso 300 CN Boron 2 CN Cab 20 CN Iso 900 CN Iso 300 and Cab 8 dx are not the top line racket at the introduction moment, but also have the CN version. Other than the top line, I think CN version may also be affected by Chinese National teams's opinion and choice.
Do you think the Chinese team can ask for certain specifications, perhaps different from the standard, or maybe even more exactly matching the standard. Cab 8dx (I have one too) was one of the best rackets of it's day. I'm not sure about Iso-300, perhaps it could have been a reasonable choice of a pro Chinese player when it was first introduced. Does anyone have a CN racket that would never have been used by a pro player?
Now, let us think this through. If the Chinese can ask for certain specifications, so can the Indonesians and the Danes, and the Koreans. The very idea of Yonex racquets being made to suit a country's national team is fraught with danger, as it will create distrust of Yonex by all and sundry, with whispering rumours getting out of hand that Yonex is making a special grade only for the Chinese team. You think Yonex will do this? Also, the idea that China gets the first "bite of the cherry" in choosing Yonex's production run in Japan is another PR nightmare for Yonex.
I agree with you. Why would the Chinese team receive any favouritism? Perhaps they just get the CN designation to track their distribution but still makes me wonder why the Chinese team wold get a designation all of their own. Like you say, it would be a PR nightmare for Yonex if the rumours about CN rackets were true, but then again by having this special designation they've made a lot of rumours already. I guess they never reckoned on the power of the Internet. One more thing though. Because no other team has its own designation, it could lead to tighter quality control as the people who check the rackets know that these rackets are destined to be used by pro players. I mean, it could be a way of singling out these rackets, even if it wasn't intentional. However, this would be dependent on when the quality control was done - before or after the designation?? Thinking logically, I tend to agree that there's probably no difference between CN and other country codes but it's still a mystery that could only be solved by getting information from the source (I mean real inside infomation not Yonex PR) or by doing a lot more blind testing. Is it mostly the people on this website from Hong Kong who've got CN rackets?
In my idea, CN racket is the selected better grade stocks in production. (If you work in a factory, you would find that even products are injected by same machine, there are some better and some are not so good) In the same case, Korea National Team, Indoesia National Team ........ should also have the first graded racket as per China National Team. My main point is that since some players may prefer flex shaft rather than stiff shaft, then Yonex selects the best batch in some models specially for these players. The top line of Yonex is ISO 800 at earily 90's, but ISO 300 also has the CN version. So, ISO 300 CN should be the best batch of ISO 300 then provide for the player who prefer flex shaft in China National Team. I really cannot 100% prove it since I am not the National Team menber. Regarding to the performance of CN, in my experience, 20 CN can support 29-30lbs of string, but 20 SP would break when stringing in 26lbs.
If what you say is true, then Yonex shouldn't be selling racquets with the same name/brand to the public, i.e. an MP99 is an MP99 whether it has an SP or a CN; to say otherwise would be a fraud. If I were Yonex's lawyer, I would advise Yonex to re-label a CN MP99 as an "Improved MP99", that is if the CN is really a better racquet. But Yonex hasn't done that. So you draw your own conclusions.
the debate goes on... i have no proof either but i would try to use common sense and logic. when one says yonex pick out the best rackets from production run, how do they chose which ones are the best? Unlike CPU where intel can quantitatively measures against many known benchmark before labelling them under various speeds. What constitutes best rackets from the batch? Many says cn/cp can take more tension, so does this mean the heaviest copies get stamped with cn/cp? However, this contradicts what i have learned from one person who owned several cn/cp with weight of 2U coming in across the range of 90-94g. CPU are rated based on dynamic testing. The only way to rate cn/cp rackets are by dynamic testing and i dont see yonex pros standing at the end of the assembly line swinging each of yonex rackets nor yonex do loading test on each racket. Proper test procedures are very time consuming. No way i believe yonex test each and every racket. If this is true, there is no way yonex can tell which ones are the best copies, assuming there are tests to show that. Being in national team doesnt mean anything because players really dont care or dont know how their rackets are made, plus the fact pros dont string their own rackets so they dunno racket stress behavior at 23 vs 33 lbs. disclosure: i have 0 CN and 0 SP racket. CD is the best
In my opinion, the whole CN racket thing is an ingenious ploy by Yonex marketing for some extra publicity and bit of profit making for the retailers. A while ago few of us pooled together our Ti-10s and one of the visting Chinese guy had a Ti-10CN (!). We all had a good test of each and everyone's racket, ranging from AS, GR, SP, TH, KR, JP, TW and a CN, and each one of us agreed that they all felt different, thanks to broad difference in string type, tension, and grip preference by individuals. I doubt any of us would be able to tell any difference between these rackets that day if all of them had same strings, tensions, grips and had the serial numbers covered. (Well, all of them except for SP which has a lable on its shaft). In my opinion a professionally strung TH version will feel and play better than a CN done by a department store clerk and negates any minute positive aspects a CN racket might possess from being a superior one-off from the production line.
i think u gave yonex too much credit on this one. I think it is marketing ploy of local retailers, usually from asian market. I dont think yonex had said that cn/cp are better, in fact, many replies from yonex have said rackets to chinese players are no special. Technically, HK stores can't order non HK rackets from their distributors. As we know, some do have JP and CN/CP version meaning they have to break their agreement with yonex to import them. To recoup such risky ventures, exporters have to sell higher and of course importers(in HK) have to and want to sell higher. It is all done low key which yonex japan see it as a minor violation not worth pursuing. (Retailers there have ways to hide these transaction and it's hard for yonex japan or yonex HK to penalize them) I wont go into detail of their business way. Same thing goes for stores in toronto (unnamed) brought back SP and sell them in CD market. SP vs CD quality, that's an another issue hehehe OOps, i hope i didnt say too much. Just an opinion from a guy living in the frozen north.
I don't know how many members in BC are working in factory with the injection machine. If the racket is after painted, then nobody can select the better one since the outlook are the same. But before paint, you can find the differences. For an injection machine, not all injections are in same pressure. Some bubbles and hair lines exist when pressue is not stable. For Zinc Alloy (my factory's major business), the bubbles and hair lines would weaken the product itself. For carbon products, the situation should be almost the same. Attached please find the picture of a non-CN racket, bubbles really exist. I am not brave enough to do the same operation with my CN rackets. In fact all of my CN rackets are got from Post Chinese Team and Hong Kong Team members. No body can provide a 100% objective comment on CN racket. But I really want to know that how many persons are tried the CN racket in this forum.
Forrest Yung, I am not convinced that CN racquets are anything special. I have had several exchanges with Yonex authoritative source that the Yonex racquets used in the recent Thomas/Uber cup rounds in KL by the players are exactly the same Yonex type that you and I own, and that includes the SP ones. This discussion came about when I asked how the Yonex stringers in the T/U cup round in KL could easily string up to 30 lbs without breaking one single racquet.
It is not wrong for me to say that china is and had been the badminton power house. Allegations from chinese opposition include chinese team throwing away certain games, faking injuries, and seeding manipulation to their advantage. However, i have not heard any players or coaches of other countries directed to chinese players having special advantage of using special (cn/cp/jp) rackets. Even if there is any slight hint of advantage of cn/cp/jp rackets, i'm sure rumor is abound by now and other yonex sponsored players would demand cn/cp/jp equivalent rackets. However, cn/cp/jp myths and rumors are abound at retail level and users. If the national pros can't tell the difference or don't care, surely we it makes no difference for us lowbies either.
Very good point you have there.. I agree totally... maybe just happens that those JPs , CN , Cps that i purchased is more durable and tougher than those SPs that i have. Even the painting look much better.
About the designation codes Days ago, I chatted with a players who once got sponsored by the famous brands. The story about the designation codes was not purely related to the quality but more related to physical properties. As you know, the rackets are put onto the instruments for measuring the weights and balance points; they are categorized into different groups by these measures. The rackets in the same group (or similar groups) would be given the same code. This means that you might be able to get similar rackets if you bought two at the same time but they might be very different if they were from the different batches. This more or less explains the difference between rackets from different areas (but not those CN/CP ones). It is likely that players in the national teams could get better rackets. Before the paint job, the bubbles and some other mechanical defects should be possibly found (and might be corrected) . After the finishing, the adjustment of balance points and weight could be fulfilled. So you can see that there are a lot of things to do for a "perfect" racket. For the commercial batches, I don't think this tuning procedure are done in the way as meticulous as the ones got sent to the pro players. The way to see is that those CN/CP are still from the commercial batches, but from a statistical point of view, they are (at least) of quality in the region of mean+1 stdev, i.e. top 16% of a batch, and later getting more/better "tunings". -SC
