i'm just wondering if thinner strings have better performance than thick ones. can you point me to the right direction? are there advantages and disadvantages between the two?
If both thick and thin strings are made of the same material, thinner strings should give you more power and control over thicker strings. Thinner strings bite into the shuttle base deeper, giving more control. They are also more powerful because of less air-resistance in shot-making, allowing a faster handspeed. However, thinner strings wear faster, especially so in cold and dry conditions. That means it will cost more playing with thinner strings.
Do thinner strings have better performance than thicker ones? . Question: Do thinner strings have better performance than thicker ones? Answer: IMHO, it would be foolish to give a 'yes' or 'no' answer. (1) The reason why players select thinner strings is because feel better playing with them. It's in the 'Feel' that they like. (2) If there is a clear advantage for thinner strings in the 'Performance', then fewer players would buy/use the thicker ones. And the manufacturers would only make thinner ones. To have an idea of how thinner strings rate, click here .
we also have to consider what performance means. is it just the feel, or is it the whole thing, including durability. Thicker string hold durability. some like durability. Others like feel. Also, performance can be considered slightly, if not really, subjective. string feel is slightly different for each person. we all have different tastes in string. therefore, we can't truly tell you. Lin Dan uses BG- 65. i dont think that is an impediment.... however, assuming this is all theoretical, taneepak's statement hits the sweetspot.
BG-65 isn't huge though. It's only 0.4mm (at tension) thicker than BG-66 and that's Yonex's thinnest string. In comparison to quite a lot of strings, it isn't too thick. At really high tensions, you need a fairly thick string for them to last more than a few shots, this is one of the reasons I think LD uses BG-65 the other being it feels pretty decent at high tensions.
i think the fact that we have the world's top players, from TH using bg66 to LD using bg65, all using different gauges tells it all. different thickness affect different players differently (ok, used different too much), so the best advice is, have a go using each, remember which one you like best and stick to it.
At high tensions (29 to 31 lbs), BG-65 works extremely well for me. I've found its response the best on the AT-700 Limited Edition (On the Ti-10 and the AT-900T, I still prefer BG-66 Sharp.) Also, the BG-65 doesn't seem to do well on Apacs racquets. I'm not sure why... it might have to do with flexible shafts.
You can have a look at Yonex's own rating on repulsion (power) and control of their family of strings. Compare BG65 vs BG66, BG85 vs BG80, NBG98 vs NBG95, BG68Ti vs BG65Ti. In almost every case their thinner string is more powerful than their thicker counterpart. The same with control. The same results are shown with Ashaway strings. The fact that Lin Dan plays with BG65 does not change this. Maybe for LD the trade off in choosing a thicker string outweighs the greater repulsion of BG66, specifically in durability.
By stringing BG65 at very high tension (from 30lbs+) you can get something roughly equivalent although not quite to a BG66 at a much cheaper cost. LD I believe uses 34lbs on BG65.
My choice has little to do with Lin Dan. I share neither his looks nor his skills My choice of BG-65 was prompted by several factors; 1. It's cheaper than BG-66 and is far cheaper than BG-66 Sharp 2. At 30 pounds, it imparts a 'powerful' feeling 3. At 30 pounds, it offers as much control as any other string 4. It is durable (BG-66 usually breaks before the 3rd week is out) My only point of discontent is its inability to hold tension. After a few days, you can clearly feel the drop in its crispness. Of course, there isn't any noticeable sag but it feels blunted. Unfortunately, local stringers are unwilling to string at 33 pounds. If not, I would surely start at that tension - and then allow it to drop. As a durable string, that would then give me 3 weeks of happiness. I need to find a copy of 'Stringing For Dummies' and a bargain machine
I concur with Oldhand. Our decision comes down economy, durability and playability and has nothing to do with Lin Dan . BG-65 shines at 33.0 lbs X 36.3 lbs . Come on Oldhand, get the Victor C-7030 and you shall have your salvation .
Have you tried BG70PRO? It feels good at higher tensions, and it's very stiff, stiffer than BG80 IMO. Tension holding is great. EDIT: I know Pete LSD tortures his racquets with BG70PRO sometimes...
Salvation will have to wait until I find a stringer here who will do the job. It's quite annoying to see stringers back off when you mention 33 pounds
Oldhand, all strings will only play at their best for no more than one week, more so with BG65. LD gets it strung at no cost, so a restring at every tournament is mandatory. At this rate BG65 can prove to be as expensive if you are not LD.
33Lbs is a very high tension though, sir. I can see why you'd use it with BG-65 but I'd imagine it's well outside the recommended tension of your racket (what are you using now?). I'm not saying the racket can't take it, chances are, it can but the stringer wouldn't want it to break on their machine or within a few shots. I definitely think if you want to go that high, you should learn to string rackets. I understand a stringing machine is a rather large outlay and you'd need to spend time learning but in the end, the machine will pay for itself and you'll get exactly what you want.
