Results 528 to 544 of 822
Thread: DinkALot's Racket Review
04-15-2009, 04:49 AM #528
Hello? Is this bandmintoncentral.com? Or Pixar.com?
What I've realised is that Dinky Pandas' reviews are useless to all but the top 10% of people that come here, and even then you'd have to play to his style and standard which essentially makes the information statistically irrelevant.
Even more so when you consider a big chunk of the boffins who frequent this site seem to think whatever is good for Lin Dan is just perfect for them.
APACS Lethal 50? Who the heck on this forum would even be able to pick the thing up, let alone swing it around! Crikey, it's like pulling Excalibur out of the rock!
04-15-2009, 05:05 AM #529
You do't really have to play at Dink's level (which I guess is pretty high) - he spells out very simply in the review who the racket is suited for. You know whether you like flexible or stiff shafts and whether you play doubles or singles and whether you're offensive or defensive. Dink gives his personal overview at the end and I guess frame feel is subjective but other than that, the review is really just observation.
I haven't played with the L50 but I'm sure it's not that heavy and stiff. I mean, there are heavier and stiffer rackets off the shelf than it.
Also, who frequents this forum and thinks Lin Dan's gear is just the best full stop? I can't think of anyone.
04-15-2009, 05:23 AM #530
You're right. There isn't a single thread in the history of this form that goes something like "OMG! Lin Dan is wearing Li Ning shoes! Where can I buy them!" or....."Taufik has a RED shirt!"
Nope, not a single thread.
*sigh* I yearn for the good old days....when you just bought a Cab8, 20, or 21, depending solely on what you could afford.
Last edited by Easy Tiger; 04-15-2009 at 05:25 AM.
04-15-2009, 08:07 PM #531
Technically...I dont' think anybody here would argue the NS7000 to be more powerful than a Ti-10....or head heavier....or more durable. His data holds merit, but those are his findings, and his only, if you like it and agree, that's great for you, if you don't...it's fine but be aware that his reviews are good for other people.
04-16-2009, 02:25 AM #532
The rackets are reviewed relative to their peers so you get a very good idea of what the rackets are like in respect to one another. In other words if you know what one or 2 rackets are like you get a very good idea of what the reviewed racket is like.
I for one find the chart invaluable and have used it as a buying guide for 3 rackets so far. All purchases I am very happy with.
I should also be picking up a woven7 tomorrow that will make it 4
I really appreciate you doing this dan... thanks for taking the time and effort
04-16-2009, 07:05 PM #533
hey dinkalot why aint theere any proace rackets in ur chart
heard tht proace rackets r better than apac rackets
is tht true
n btw where can yu buy proace rackets here in ontario
r at least can i get a site where i can buy proace racekts online?
04-16-2009, 07:32 PM #534
Besides dink sells all his 'used' equipment he doesnt like for great prices. :P
Last edited by illusionistpro; 04-16-2009 at 07:39 PM.
04-21-2009, 04:46 AM #535
I've got my SOTX D-600 this morning!
/Unpacking a new racket feels soooo good!/
It looks great!
Mine is: 88g, BP 292mm with purple BS-963 at 22x24. In my hand it feels head heavy, but not that beast as described by some of you. And it's long -- oh yeah it is long!
And it is Stiff, no doubt, but not the stiffest I've tried.
Another thing is -- it looks a lot better 'live' than on those pictures.
Testing it tonight, hope BS-963 is good!
04-21-2009, 12:31 PM #536
04-22-2009, 01:35 AM #537
You are right, however, that if used like the bible (just believe everything), the guide may be applicable only as you have stated. Others use it as a guide (as what Dink intended) and apply what they already know of some of the rackets and try to extrapolate what the other rackets in the guide may be like.
If anything, this compendium is much more useful that those marketing materials from any company. I find Dink's guide more accurate and extensive at the same time. It also presents it as a player will feel it instead of marketing terms like nano-science or X-fooler-rains which does not translate to any value to me.
04-22-2009, 03:57 AM #538
Agree with Weeyeh, my reviews are not intended for the Top 10%, in fact, it's specifically designed for the masses.
I'm in the process of redoing the reviews again to assign numerical values because I get so many questions about "good" vs. "excellent" vs. "average".
As I have said countless times, there's no exact science to this stuff, everything is a relative comparison but I guess many don't understand so again, I will assign numerical values and explain them as clearly as possible.
04-22-2009, 05:50 AM #539
04-22-2009, 02:21 PM #540
You will get just as many questions/challenges about numbers as you do from adjectives.
Besides, words let the reader put his own shade of grey on your opinions.
Take a page from the politicians' handbook: The last thing you want to do, in trying to please the unpleasable, is to make your views more rigidly defined.
04-22-2009, 04:06 PM #541
Actually, if Dink convert the chart to numerical values, it would be quite accurate. Given that each attribute is out of 10, each member here would like to make a decision/comparison table can easily do it.
First define how much you value each attribute from most important(10) and least important
Your badminton style and values.
for example, if you are
on a budget you'll value durability high
whereas you're more of a defensive player you'll value defense higher than power
***key point, do not assign too many redundant values (ex dont value power=10 and control=10 with everything else 9)
Dink's Converted Charts example
ABC Racket: Power=9 / Defense=7 / Control=8 / stiffness= 8.5 / Stability= 10 / Durability= 10
XYZ Racket: Power=10/ Defense=8 / Control 9 / Stiffness=9 / stability 6 / Durabilty=8
***statistics would be similar between the two rackets
ABC Racket: Power=72 / Defense=63 / Control=48 / Stiffness= 59.5 / stability= 50 / Durability= 100
XYZ Racket: Power=80 / Defense=72 / Control=54 / Stiffness= 63 / Stability= 30 / Durability=80
ABC Racket: 72+63+48+59.5+50+100=392.5
XYZ Racket: 80+72+54+63+30+80=379
not sure this would help the mass majority, but if the racket chart is converted to numerical values, maybe this way of formulating your decision making process in purchasing the next suitable racket would be easier rather than the
"excellent-" or "good+"
if someone can clarify for me that would be GREAT because i'm FOB
Last edited by Distanc3; 04-22-2009 at 04:07 PM. Reason: bold values
04-22-2009, 06:27 PM #542
Look, everyone knows reviews are subjective, and of course you're going to get people to disagree, and of course you're going to get people to suggest better ways of presenting the information. I think it's ludicrous to do a review and then complain about these things, because they come with the territory. Take the ones you think are valuable, ignore the ones you think aren't. Simple.
I think the list is a fantastic resource, but let's not kid ourselves. It's not perfect, but let's face it - who else has the resources to do something even vaguely like this? It's a great - but flawed - resource.
And again, just because someone does, doesn't make it automatically beyond reproach.
Can we just let the organic nature of dialogue just happen, and not get all precious as righteous about it?
04-22-2009, 07:10 PM #543
This is exactly why I don't want to assign numerical values. There should be no "summation" because each person doesn't want a sum of what's the best racket, they want certain aspects to weigh more heavily than others.
Heck, if two people are two different levels of play, they will probably disagree on rackets.
I wrote a lengthy and detailed example but I decided not to post it because...
...anyway, I'm still gonna think about how to relate everything numerically but like Tiger said, it's not exact, not even close, just my best estimate.
04-22-2009, 08:05 PM #544
For example im going to use 2 parameters stiffness and balance. If stiffness got a 9 (stiff) and balance got a 7 (moderate) the overall score is 16. If another racket for stiffness of 7 (moderate) and balance of 9 (head heavy) you still get 16. Now a moderately stiff head heavy racket is enormously different to a stiff racket with moderate balance. Like Dan said, you cant look at the values as a whole. Take the aspects of each racket with a grain of salt and you can tell how they will play relative to each other. For what it matters, I think the review is fine how it is now.
By DinkAlot in forum Clothing & FootwearReplies: 271: 11-18-2013, 11:31 AM
By DinkAlot in forum Badminton StringReplies: 445: 09-08-2013, 08:46 PM
By DinkAlot in forum Badminton Stringing Techniques & ToolsReplies: 309: 12-30-2009, 02:26 AM
By gy79bc in forum Racket Recommendation / ComparisonReplies: 14: 06-04-2008, 08:51 PM
By yoyomonkey in forum General ForumReplies: 4: 08-31-2006, 01:07 PM