Results 52 to 68 of 81
Thread: squash vs badminton
12-13-2006, 05:05 PM #52Originally Posted by toddster
12-13-2006, 05:08 PM #53Originally Posted by Tianjin
12-13-2006, 05:19 PM #54
For what it's worth (my bold)
In sports where endurance is an important component in performance, such as cycling, rowing, cross-country skiing and running, world class athletes typically have high VO2 maximums. World class male athletes, cyclists and cross-country skiers typically exceed 80 ml/kg/min and a rare few may exceed 90 ml/kg/min for men and 70 ml/kg/min for women. Three times Tour de France winner Greg LeMond is reported to have had a VO2 max of 92.5 at his peak - one of the highest ever recorded, while fellow cyclist Miguel Indurain and cross-country skier Bjørn Dæhlie both measured at an astounding 96 ml/kg/min. It should also be noted that Daehlie's result was achieved out of season and that physiologist Erlend Hem who was responsible for the testing stated that he would not discount the possibility of the skier passing 100 ml/kg/min at his absolute peak. By comparison a competitive club athlete might achieve a VO2 max of around 70 ml/kg/min. World class rowers are physically very large endurance athletes and typically do not score as high on a per weight basis, but often score exceptionally high in absolute terms.
12-13-2006, 10:38 PM #55Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls
The reason that you can't really compare V02max in athletes in different sports is because sports involving more muscle groups working aerobically will naturally use more oxygen. For example, a long distance runner or cyclist uses their arms at a much lower percentage of their local aerobic ability than a cross-country skier, while the legs in all of those athletes are taxed to the max aerobic ability - so the difference in V02max is obvious.
A lot of the info on V02max also happens to be based on continuous movement endurance sports. For stop and go sports like badminton and squash, it is much harder to quantify the energy systems needs because many movements are anaerobic, with the aerobic system acting as more of a supportive energy system.
Note that in the article by Omosegaard about PEHL's physical training tests, his V02max went down between 1988 and 1992. The reason? He previously spent too much time focusing on this ability and his overall playing ability was improved by redistributing his training to other areas.
12-14-2006, 06:57 AM #56Originally Posted by stumblingfeet
Hence my belief that its "harder" to excel in badminton as you have to optimize both for anaerobic and aerobic excercise, in squash I think you can focus more on the aerobic training, and less on the anaerobic parts.
12-24-2006, 03:33 PM #57Originally Posted by kmodak
04-05-2012, 04:38 PM #58
Very interesting discussion. One can play both sports at a very intense level and during the longest rallies you can reach your maximum heart rate. In general, squash rallies tend to last longer (as per studies done on racquet game rally lengths). Here some interesting information regarding different racquet games and about their intensity:
My personal observations come from using heart rate monitor for 4 years now while playing and excercising, also during competitive squash and badminton games. I play both squash and badminton pretty much at the same level when comparing my own skill level and those of my opponents (approx. national level B). Throughout the those years, with squash I tend to regularly go above 1000 calories burned over an hour whereas badminton burns ca. 800 calories. However, with very intensive game of badminton I have reached up +1k calories burned and hear rate peaking at maximum (202bpm, just if you are interested comparing the calories, my weight is between 82-84kg).
This is just to give some idea how my body reacts to these amazing and entertaining racquet games. In the end, what makes the one or the other "tougher" really boils down to your own skill level in the game. Badminton is easier to start with but once you develop your game, squash enables you to withhold longer rallies.
These are just my few pennies for the topic.
04-05-2012, 06:45 PM #59
This table is from Liverpool John Moores University's scientist MacLaren (1998: p. 43):
Kilojoule per minute estimate
LO HI -- the racket sport
29 46 -- badminton
29 42 -- table tennis
29 46 -- tennis
42 76 -- squash
Last edited by Tadashi; 04-05-2012 at 06:52 PM. Reason: athlete's weight: 70kg
04-05-2012, 11:45 PM #60
what stops your squash opponent from hitting the ball and making it bounce directly back at them and not getting out of your way to retrieve it? seems like an easy thing to exploit.
04-06-2012, 12:08 AM #61
04-06-2012, 12:11 AM #62
04-06-2012, 12:13 AM #63
badminton > squash
04-06-2012, 12:25 AM #64
04-06-2012, 12:28 AM #65
04-06-2012, 01:40 AM #66
04-06-2012, 02:07 AM #67
I used to love squash until it screwed up my knee, now I only play badminton mostly singles.
Squash is a game that I enjoyed playing but hate watching.
Badminton is a game that I enjoy playing and watching.
To me both sports were equally taxing especially since I was never into that boring straight strokes near the wall.
04-06-2012, 03:16 AM #68
By Yoppy in forum Clothing & FootwearReplies: 2: 08-25-2010, 02:31 AM
By pablo285 in forum Clothing & FootwearReplies: 4: 04-05-2009, 06:22 AM
By RevoWithin in forum General ForumReplies: 19: 09-05-2008, 08:35 AM
By frankcent in forum Techniques / TrainingReplies: 3: 11-17-2007, 03:01 PM
By ants in forum General ForumReplies: 12: 09-02-2003, 10:29 PM