User Tag List

Page 7 of 20 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 LastLast
Results 103 to 119 of 336
  1. #103
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Philippines
    Posts
    25
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wilfredlgf
    I actually smash harder with a Ti-10 than a Cab 21. Much harder.

    This another reason why racquets are very much an individual thing - each will function differently in different hands and different styles. The Yonex graphs are there as a comparison for what they are INTENDED to be. When you wield it, it will become what it is to you.

    But it shouldn't deviate that far from the intended specs anyway, so the graph is a good rough guide. The most accurate guide will be your own arms.
    I smash better on a Ti10 than on my MP100, better speed and height (both stringed with BG68ti at 23 lbs.) and yet the Yonex chart says the MP100 is more powerful.

    Anyway, wilfredlgf is right, the chart is just a good rough guide, your performance is a more accurate guide.

  2. #104
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Cannock, UK
    Posts
    2,908
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by quicksilver_07
    great explanation on the chart, but i still don't get one thing. what does all the ISO-TIS(SR) (i think thats how it loos like) and all the rest of the ISO-TIS(**) mean/stand for?
    The ISO-TI racquet came in 4 versions with different stiffness.
    From most flexible to most stiff: SA SR SS SX

  3. #105
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    36
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Thumbs up Now i get it...

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls
    The ISO-TI racquet came in 4 versions with different stiffness.
    From most flexible to most stiff: SA SR SS SX
    Thanks a lot for taking the time to explain what it meant. Nowi finally am able to get it.

  4. #106
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    sg
    Posts
    535
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default



    Interesting to compare the Japanese ratings to the ratings of the Yonex Thailand site. Notice the position of the NS8000 vs MP100. Maybe TH racquets are indeed different
    Attached Images Attached Images  

  5. Likes drmchsraj liked this post
  6. #107
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    virginia, USA
    Posts
    23
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Probably "Matrix-007" for the next one.

  7. #108
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Holland
    Posts
    3,962
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ok, the vertical ranking is explainable..offensive or not.

    but what's teh deal with singles/doubles? control? durability?

  8. #109
    Regular Member DinkAlot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    dcbadminton.net
    Posts
    12,158
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ants
    Actually based on Yonex's official chart NS8000 just became the no.1 offensive racket.
    I just noticed this. Hmmmmmm, I'd say more marketing than real world experience because though the NS8000 is powerful for it's relative lightness, it's definitely not the most powerful racket in the Yonex line-up. In fact, I feel the Ti10, MP100, MP99, AT700, AT800-OF, AT800-DE and Cab30 are all more powerful. I haven't tried the others or not enough to make a fair comparison. YMMV.

  9. #110
    New Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Fremont, CA
    Posts
    4
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ??



    look at the MP40/44, i dont understand how in one it can be above the Y-axis line, noticably above the MP80/88 and in the other below the 60/66 which is noticably lower than the MP80/88

    so what is it exactly? ><

  10. Likes drmchsraj liked this post
  11. #111
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    167
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    When the NS8000 came out, the position of the NS7000 was changed to more defensive.. I guess it's a way of marketing...


    Quote Originally Posted by palmboy5
    ??



    look at the MP40/44, i dont understand how in one it can be above the Y-axis line, noticably above the MP80/88 and in the other below the 60/66 which is noticably lower than the MP80/88

    so what is it exactly? ><

  12. #112
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    445
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by palmboy5
    ??



    look at the MP40/44, i dont understand how in one it can be above the Y-axis line, noticably above the MP80/88 and in the other below the 60/66 which is noticably lower than the MP80/88

    so what is it exactly? ><
    Japanes Muscle Power 40 is a different racket to UK MP44

  13. #113
    New Member
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Fremont, CA
    Posts
    4
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fast3r
    Japanes Muscle Power 40 is a different racket to UK MP44
    oh ok thanks.

    Stijn,

    doesnt look like the NS7000 was moved at all with the addition of the NS8000?
    Last edited by palmboy5; 10-08-2005 at 12:58 PM.

  14. Likes drmchsraj liked this post
  15. #114
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    167
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by palmboy5
    oh ok thanks.

    Stijn,
    doesnt look like the NS7000 was moved at all with the addition of the NS8000?
    In this chart, no, but I've seen (possibly Belgian) charts with the NS7000 at top.

    Kind regards,
    Stijn

  16. #115
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    calgary
    Posts
    293
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    In different parts of the world there are different specs to the models. Not versions as some of you believe but specs. For instance in Canada there are specific grip sizes and weights offered that the chart is based on for Canada and the USA. In other areas the grips and weights are different to reflect the differences in buying patterns of each area. North Americans for the most part want raquets with larger grips and weights than Europe and Asia. The charts get printed for each territory by the distributor not by Japan. Because some of the raquets only come one way in a territory they are different than Japan. Example MP88 for Canada is one grip size/one weight. Not so in other parts of the world. Same as the MP44 in Canada is different for Canada and Great Britain. As for doubles and singles differentiation the chart is a rough guide as this is what the raquet is intended for by the design team not a law. Still the bottom line is try before you buy.

  17. #116
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    182
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kwun
    the balance (head heavy vs. head light). if you look at the chart for the 4 different TiSP, they are good examples as they have one representative per quadrant:

    SX = stiff + head heavy
    SS = stiff + head light
    SR = less stiff + head heavy
    SA = less stiff + head light
    Kwun, I think most people here, including myself, are confused by the actual criteria Yonex take to decide where to fit a racket into the chart. your explaination is by far the clearest. May I rephrase it this way without changing any meaning of it:

    more shaft stiffness = offensive play-oriented
    less shaft stiffness = defensive play-oriented

    reason being stiff shaft helps you smash harder;

    more head weight = singles play-oriented
    less head weight = doubles play-oriented

    reason being less head weight helps quicker game play pace.

    However, I do have a few questions. First off, there are more factors of a racket than shaft stiffness and head weight that need to be taken into consideration, it is to me too arbitrary, therefore unlikely close to truth, to use merely two factors to draw this graph. Yonex purposedly make the criteria vague though.

    Secondly, does a stiff, or extra stiff shaft the only thing that helps you smash harder? Don't we remember what a heavy head (apart from NS series) can do for your smash has been massively discussed and believed in the forum?

    So the simple question is, what parameters on earth are the X axis and the Y axis actually based on, I mean, in technical terms, no as vague as singles or offensive oriented. Let's get right to the core. I looked through 7 pages of discussion in this thread and found that this question hasn't had a clear answer yet. (Am I missing anything here?)

    Thanks for reading.

  18. #117
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    167
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by franxon
    So the simple question is, what parameters on earth are the X axis and the Y axis actually based on, I mean, in technical terms, no as vague as singles or offensive oriented. Let's get right to the core. I looked through 7 pages of discussion in this thread and found that this question hasn't had a clear answer yet. (Am I missing anything here?)

    Thanks for reading.
    Well, it isn't very simple to make a chart I guess. Different players prefer different rackets. However, to help the customer somehow, apparently Yonex developed this chart to give you a direction. If you already know what kind of racket (stiff, head-heavy,...) you want, the chart can be quite useless and confusing.

  19. #118
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Lymm, United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,287
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Stijn
    Well, it isn't very simple to make a chart I guess. Different players prefer different rackets. However, to help the customer somehow, apparently Yonex developed this chart to give you a direction. If you already know what kind of racket (stiff, head-heavy,...) you want, the chart can be quite useless and confusing.
    totally agree.

    i seem to remember somebody saying that the chart wasn't based on racquets at all, more a survey of people who use yones racquets and what type of players they thought themselves to be..

    this said the charts are useless..unless you value the opinion of other people..

    Coops

  20. #119
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    182
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by coops241180
    totally agree.

    i seem to remember somebody saying that the chart wasn't based on racquets at all, more a survey of people who use yones racquets and what type of players they thought themselves to be..

    this said the charts are useless..unless you value the opinion of other people..

    Coops
    The question of most importance here is not about the usefulness of the chart, but about the criteria yonex use to fit every racquet into it. i.e. WHAT ON EAHTH the x-axis and y-axis are based on.

    Besides, I don't think one can accurately evaluate the usefulness or uselessness of a chart before one can interpret it.

    Where a racquet fits in the chart being based on the way professionals use it is definitely purely fictional.

    First off, some racquets in the chart are NEVER used by any professionals.

    Second off, if it's based on players, not racquet itself, why does AT700 have such an EXTREM attack to defense ratio in the chart? Is it because its users, such as Taufik or Chen Hong or Peter Gade, by nature are so much an attacker and so little a defender? Or is it because pros play so much attacking and so little defending with AT700, statistically? NEITHER.

    Third off, if it's statistics, why does AT700 have such a MODERATE singles to doubles ratio in the chart? AT700 is vastly used by singles players (there are a few who use AT700 in doubles though), but AT700 is, so are many other so called "singles rackets", IN THE MIDDLE of x-axis. That suggests equal number of singles and doubles players who use AT700. Something doesn't sound right here, right?

    The belief that the chart is statistics is to me fallacious.
    Last edited by franxon; 11-09-2005 at 11:21 PM.

Page 7 of 20 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Yonex String Chart
    By calfunz in forum Badminton String
    Replies: 137
    : 12-17-2012, 01:50 PM
  2. New Yonex Racket chart!~
    By StrikeGX in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 11
    : 10-02-2010, 07:20 AM
  3. Yonex shoes size chart..
    By Reiko in forum Clothing & Footwear
    Replies: 17
    : 01-06-2008, 01:42 AM
  4. Help! Strings Chart from Yonex.com
    By sbowesuk in forum Badminton String
    Replies: 10
    : 04-14-2007, 11:43 PM
  5. yonex chart-NS9000
    By doris160260 in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 2
    : 02-08-2006, 11:26 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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