## User Tag List

1. Regular Member
Join Date
May 2010
Location
Shepperton
Posts
255
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
0 Post(s)
Tagged
It is still possible but for the average player its too much of a beast.

Its all about the best combos really and also how you feel with the racket. Mid/stiff and even balance or head heavy is a good combo for me doubles wise on the defensive. Head heavy and stiff for singles and if i am attacking in doubles a the same as singles but a lighter racket does the job.

Most of the physics i would say is about the player, you can say all day a head heavy racket gets more power than head light but it depends. Assuming you hit the sweet spot then Head Light (less head mass) needs a fast swing and head heavy (more head mass) doesn't need to be as fast.

So you would think connecting with less mass you need more power. Its not a case of the connection more getting the racket to that connection. If its mass it at the head the that will create more drag. So in reality you need a faster swing to connect that mass.

This is why i use head heavy rackets, i can feel the drag but i swing head light rackets stupidly fast that i can't adjust and miss the birdie.

So overall yes more mass equals more power on connection but its like finding terminal velocity, you need to add drag into the equation. You can throw a pebble faster than you can a rock, you need more energy in the throw to throw the rock as fast.

2. Regular Member
Join Date
Jan 2004
Location
Hong Kong
Posts
6,527
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
2 Post(s)
Tagged
Originally Posted by Smithy88
There is only one way to test this. You have to test every single variable.

You need:

3 Rackets: All Extra Stiff - 1 Head Heavy, 1 Even, 1 Head Light
3 Rackets: All Stiff - 1 Head Heavy, 1 Even, 1 Head Light
3 Rackets: All Medium - 1 Head Heavy, 1 Even, 1 Head Light

This way you can test every variable of the racket. You can test:

a) Varied stiffness in ALL head heavy rackets
b) Varied stiffness in ALL even rackets
c) Varied stiffness in ALL head light rackets

Here we have tested how the stiffness of the shaft is affected by the balance

d) Extra stiff in ALL varied balance
e) Stiff in ALL varied balance
f) Medium in ALL Varied balance

Here we have tested how balance is affected by the balance.

These 2 may sound the same but they are not as the first you are testing one stiffness with different balance i.e 3 Head heavy 1 stiffness. The second is testing one balance with different stiffness i.e. 3 Stiff 1 balance. For all of these rackets you need to use the most basic of swings at an average tension.

Then you move onto strings. You now need to string one type of racket with every different string. To make things average out take a stiff shaft with even balance as its the mid point.

Once you have done that you then need to combine the lot. String every single different racket with every single different string to find which is the best combination.

That isn't even including physical variables i.e. who is using the racket.

Basically the whole idea is a bit much as badminton companies have physicists working on this stuff who can use their knowledge and computer programs to test their theories.

Why do you think there is rarely an extra stiff head light racket. Its because you would get no power at all and would be 100% defense.

The best option to test this theory is to pick just one variable, the racket being the obvious one but you need to find them with similar technology.
These tests will lead you to nowhere. Using your criteria one can have a very stiff racquet with "jelly-like" materials of low quality carbon. Stiffness of the shaft is utterly useless on a frame that will distort from power shots. The frame is the heart of a racquet, its shaft can be designed to be from flexible to very stiff to suit individual timing and preferred flex or bend point.

3. Regular Member
Join Date
May 2010
Location
Shepperton
Posts
255
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
0 Post(s)
Tagged
Originally Posted by taneepak
These tests will lead you to nowhere. Using your criteria one can have a very stiff racquet with "jelly-like" materials of low quality carbon. Stiffness of the shaft is utterly useless on a frame that will distort from power shots. The frame is the heart of a racquet, its shaft can be designed to be from flexible to very stiff to suit individual timing and preferred flex or bend point.
What i am getting at is the amount of variables involved in this. Ok lets move onto the next one, materials and technology. Lets assume all these rackets are made with this the same.

The you would need a stupid amount of rackets to test the different combos of materials and technology.

4. Regular Member
Join Date
Jan 2004
Location
Hong Kong
Posts
6,527
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
2 Post(s)
Tagged
Originally Posted by Smithy88
What i am getting at is the amount of variables involved in this. Ok lets move onto the next one, materials and technology. Lets assume all these rackets are made with this the same.

The you would need a stupid amount of rackets to test the different combos of materials and technology.
No, not really. Japanese OEM manufacturers use a typically Japanese method which is simple but quite revealing. You can see some of these Japanese QC inspectors in only the very large racquet plants in China, testing each racquet individually at relatively high speed. But this Japanese method only tests for precision manufacturing, not for youngs modulus under load.
I use a 4-step protocol, including the one used by the Japs.

5. Regular Member
Join Date
May 2010
Location
Shepperton
Posts
255
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
0 Post(s)
Tagged
What i mean is for someone to just go out and scientifically test how to get the most power there is too much to go through compared with what the QC inspectors and experts working for these companies already know about racket technology.

6. Regular Member
Join Date
Jan 2004
Location
Hong Kong
Posts
6,527
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
2 Post(s)
Tagged
Originally Posted by Smithy88
What i mean is for someone to just go out and scientifically test how to get the most power there is too much to go through compared with what the QC inspectors and experts working for these companies already know about racket technology.
But this is very useful when your friends go into a sports store and want to buy a racquet model that is really great and not end up with one that is very stiff but of poor materials.

7. Regular Member
Join Date
May 2010
Location
Shepperton
Posts
255
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
0 Post(s)
Tagged
I don't know what you think i am getting at, i am agreeing that the QC is important, very important in fact. What my point is for joe bloggs to do all this would be impossible. If you are going to do an experiment like this the best way is to pick one variable.

8. Regular Member
Join Date
Jan 2004
Location
Hong Kong
Posts
6,527
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
2 Post(s)
Tagged
Originally Posted by Smithy88
I don't know what you think i am getting at, i am agreeing that the QC is important, very important in fact. What my point is for joe bloggs to do all this would be impossible. If you are going to do an experiment like this the best way is to pick one variable.
There are 4 simple tests a potential buyer can carry out to find which racquet, even of the same model, is better.
I will give you one example of the tests but will not give you details on how the test is carried out. Just have a look at the racquet frame and its stringbed. The interface between the frame and the stringbed imposes a load on the frame, resulting in distortion and warping, with power shots. The degree of distortion/warping will depend various factors, namely, the Youngs modulus of the raw materials that go to make the frame, the dimensions of the frame, and the string tension. Very high tensions will impose or transfer a greater load onto the frame and distortions/warping will be higher with power hits.
One tip, if you have racquets that are relatively of low youngs modulus and the frame dimensions are slim, then you can offset this by using lower tension. Low tensions will take more of the load with less stress on the frame, resulting in reduced frame distortion/warping common to high tension.
Very high Youngs modulus frame does not distort/warp as much and hence will give a real punch with high tension. Yes, this can be tested.

9. Regular Member
Join Date
May 2010
Location
Shepperton
Posts
255
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
0 Post(s)
Tagged
Yes this can be tested but we its not about "which racket is better for me", its "what gives badminton rackets their power". Its a combination of things and you would have to do lots of testing to find generally what gives power, not what just suits you as a player.

10. Regular Member
Join Date
Feb 2010
Location
Indonesia
Posts
115
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
0 Post(s)
Tagged
Originally Posted by kirbosmash
Physics and Power, by Kirbosmash
extra \$\$ leads to better feel and durability, but not necessarily power. On a final note, physics makes power, it is power. Let this advise your next racket purchase.
Thats not true. Good racket store the energy and release it during the impact with shuttlecock.
Cheap racket tend to convert some of the energy into vibration, etc. Remember, Input = Output + energy lost

11. Regular Member
Join Date
May 2010
Location
court
Posts
642
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
0 Post(s)
Tagged
Originally Posted by surajaya
Thats not true. Good racket store the energy and release it during the impact with shuttlecock.
Cheap racket tend to convert some of the energy into vibration, etc. Remember, Input = Output + energy lost
Totally agree with you!

However, one simple truth is a cheapo racket can beat a top grade racket...well, at least not in the world stage anyways.

12. Regular Member
Join Date
Apr 2008
Location
Singapore
Posts
105
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
0 Post(s)
Tagged
seriously i feel that it all lies in the player.

13. Regular Member
Join Date
Nov 2005
Location
Singapore
Posts
1,645
Post Thanks / Like
Mentioned
0 Post(s)
Tagged
Originally Posted by wiwi86
seriously i feel that it all lies in the player.
Nah.. it's the strings... :P

14. ## Physics-vs-Art of Playing Badminton

Originally Posted by weeyeh
Nah.. it's the strings... :P
.
Hahaha... To some, it's the racket used; to some, it's the string used; to some, it's the technique used; etc, etc, ......

To me, it's the technique used.

Just give any racket to Lee Chong Wei and/or Lin Dan and play against them.
I am sure that they won't say that they depend on their equipment(s) to defeat us.
.

15. Nah, it's the colour of your overgrip.

16. ## What is the best colour for overgrip?

Originally Posted by Maklike Tier
Nah, it's the colour of your overgrip.
.
Hahaha...... BTW, what is the best colour for overgrip?

To me, it is BLACK.
.

17. Well, as any know-it-all self-righteous high school physics kid would tell you, red is by far the fastest and can be proven by the use of a mass spectrometer, MRI and two cans of beans. However, the real world practicality of black simply cannot be ignored.

Page 3 of 4 First 1 2 3 4 Last

#### Posting Permissions

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