Results 35 to 47 of 47
Thread: Flexible racket a problem??
08-06-2010, 08:39 AM #35
08-31-2010, 10:16 PM #36
I totally disagree.
Energy waste isn't an issue here (the energy is not lost in either types racket shafts), as long as the speed at which you wing the racket is the same.
With a flex racket, you get more power. Why? Because of the extra movement of the racket head involved. At the last moment of your arm movement, the bent racket head will whip forward to hit the shuttle unlike stiff rackets where there is less deformation. That deformation is the source of the extra power you get with a flexible racket; just like string deformation is involved to send the shuttle away.
HOWEVER, I have a theory on how stiff rackets CAN generate more power than flexible rackets. High level players have amazing explosive strength. As such, they can bend stiff rackets more than the average players can; reason why they don't use flex rackets. Now, just to remind you, racket shafts are made with flexible materials with a varying degree of flexibility. The stiffer the material, the quicker the racket will return to its normal shape. With the same level of bending, the stiff shaft will reform way quicker than a flex shaft generating more force than the latter. Average players don't the necessary strength to get that level of bending from their slow swings which is why the flex racket is more compatible for them.
It is the same principle with the strings : the tighter the strings, the more power potential there is. But, you have to be able to deform the string to a certain extent to get the power advantages of the high string tension.
Also, another reason why the pros do not use the flex rackets : the incredible bending of the racket creates a delay before the racket head actually hits the shuttle, and that leads to a few problems. Timing, slow returns, control (it is difficult to get the right racket angle when its bent), etc.
03-02-2012, 08:12 AM #37
Old topic revived, the racket science in the last five years show the following facts:
- expert players swing faster, up to 15 to 25 m/s more than a novice player*
- flex shafts are about 4 times more whippy than stiff shafts**
* measured by racket head speed at contact with the shuttle, all studies on this I've read so far show that there is a huge gap between the novice players and "expert" players with respect to that speed, novice players usually smash the shuttle with 20 and 35 m/s (or 72 km/h); experts double that speed range, tournament players triple it, the world records are somewhere five times faster; so your general aim is to get into the 50+ m/s range for a smash and you're good to go.
** measured by the differences of location of several points on a racket like handle, frame and head at contact with the shuttle you will find that there is a difference between the head and the handle; so bending means that at the time of contact the shaft is deformed, not having the usual straightened form, a so called head deflection shows that stiff rackets are deformed almost close to zero (ca. 2 cm), while flex racket shafts are deformed by 8 cm (hence 4x more than stiff shafts); the reason why flexibility is related with "control" is simple, imagine a soccer player taking a ball volley but has a somewhat backleaning position ... that ball certain will fly into the air instead of straight.
03-02-2012, 12:22 PM #38
Flex racket shafts deformed by "8cm" or "8mm" ? How do they measure the deformation?
03-02-2012, 01:56 PM #39
As I said, eight centimeters measured by high speed cams recording tracking points on the racket.
03-02-2012, 03:50 PM #40
The flex properties of shaft in sports has been studied more so in golf than badminton, due to obvious disparity in prestige and prizes. But the results can still be applied to badminton, as Yonex has been doing lately.
It is generally accepted in golf that in choosing optimal equipment, the shaft flex has to match the player's swing characteristics, ie speed, tempo, snap, release. There are even specialized companies that assess and customize the equipment for the true hard core. If only we had this badminton; I think there would be a huge demand.
03-03-2012, 07:04 AM #41
Ha! I see a great business opportunity
03-04-2012, 11:21 AM #42
All you need is standard set of rackets- with incremental increases in stifness whilst keeping other factors constant, and then sets for other attributes. Could you imagine how much yonex would charge for that!!!!
If only racket manufactures could adhere to standard units of measure for balance, stifness/flex, weight etc. Finding an optimum racket would be so much easier.
03-04-2012, 11:32 AM #43
i think it will quite impossible to have a standard unit of measure as every maker to make their product more unique as compared to others
after..it is a commercial product...n not something set for world bodies or govtmental....or etc..
03-04-2012, 01:29 PM #44
03-04-2012, 01:34 PM #45
03-04-2012, 01:42 PM #46
Atm, having no standards is much better for the incumbent manuf. because it makes comparisons based on specifications much more difficult, so that it by and large prevents the consumer from conducting a reverse auction (buyer goes shopping, lowest offer wins). On the other hand, the company that sponsored the study about flex is a racket manufacturer, so if you have the most flexible and most stiff racket of that company, you probably have the rackets that produced the 2-8cm deformation range.
03-05-2012, 11:48 AM #47
as for making standards-It would probably not be possible (if even demeed feasable) financialy for any other company than yonex to do.
There are way too many factors and variabilites in badminton. First there's string and string tension, then there's shaft flex and bend profile, then head mass and the position of it which affects swing wt differently, then there's total wt. You can imagine how many rackets you need!
It won't happen so i won't add much further. but probably each of these things would be individually accounted for and there is no need for hundreds of minutely differing standards right.-as we wouldn't notice the difference.
for example, bend profile will depend mainly on the shaft length, it's fine tuning... and probably more an issue with flexible rackets.
By kkk_tbh in forum Racket Recommendation / ComparisonReplies: 12: 11-18-2011, 07:13 AM
By TNBRE in forum Badminton Rackets / EquipmentReplies: 2: 01-18-2010, 07:12 PM
By Tsuioku in forum Badminton Rackets / EquipmentReplies: 5: 12-10-2007, 05:12 AM
By Loppy in forum Badminton Rackets / EquipmentReplies: 46: 05-13-2007, 03:33 AM
By gsi4ever in forum Racket Recommendation / ComparisonReplies: 19: 04-18-2006, 08:05 AM