I just had a discussion with a friend yesterday: Chen Hong and Camilla Martin are currently playing with Ti10s. Xia Xuanze - Cab 20, Taufik - MP77, Peter Gade - Slim 10. If a big company like Yonex can claim that the latest rackets like MP99 or Armortec700 can improve your game, then why aren't the top pros using them? As a consumer, I will firstly look for the racket that the top pros are using. Say I'm a pro using a Ti10 currently and playing extremely well with it. If the racket company comes to me and offer me better racket that will improve my game (eg smash harder, more accurate etc), then I will surely switch to it, right? I will only stick to my current racket if the new one doesn't really improve aspects of my game significantly. So in terms of advertising, I would think that this is not helping the sales of the latest rackets. Here comes my point: If I were Yonex's big boss I would tell a player like Peter Gade to stick to his old and trusted Slim 10s. However I will paint all of them to look like the latest Armortec700. Xia Xuanze can stick to his Cab20 but painted as the Cab20Muscle. Similarly Camilla Martin and Chen Hong can stick to their Ti10s but painted as the Armortec700 or MP99. Tennis is currently doing this. So why not badminton? Comments?
There is such a thing as false advertising/marketing which is a big no-no in a number of countries including Canada. There are pros using MP-99, MP-100 and the new Armortec. It all boils down to personal preferences. A lot of time, a pro might not want to switch because it will take them time to adjust to a new model and if they have big tourneys coming up, they might be reluctant to switch. I think Hian is using the new Armortec and Limpele is using MP-99 (see pic)
Re: Re: Painting the Pro's Rackets That's part of the reason why most pros still use bg65 instead of bg 85 or the ti strings. Anyways, i remember somebody who was sponsored by carlton used a yonex racquet with the carlton logo sprayed on. If that's isn't false advertising, then...
Re: Re: Painting the Pro's Rackets Tennis is doing it, so why can't badminton do it as well?? Example: A is sponsered by DUNLOP, but still prefers his old racket by HEAD. So what DUNLOP does is to repaint the HEAD racket to look like one of the latest rackets by DUNLOP themselves! Also, what Mongoose is saying is that if the technology really improves/benefits your game, why aren't the pros utilizing the technology. Anyway from the recent Korean Open, I know Mia Audina is using the Yonex Swing Power Racket but she painted the Winex Logo on the strings.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Painting the Pro's Rackets No, I SAW the butt cap of her racket while she was receiving the serve from Wang Chen. It was clearly green with the YY logo on the cap.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Painting the Pro's Rackets Here's a pic of Mia using the Winex Ti Swing Power in the Swiss Open 2003
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Painting the Pro's Rackets Hmm.... perhaps I see wrongly then. But why Winex cosmetics are so similiar to Yonex (including the butt cap!)? Can be quite misleading sometimes!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Painting the Pro's Rackets Well, they don't refer to Winex as a Clonex for nothing
G'day, I think if I am a top professional at a sport where smallest margin can mean the difference between winning and losing, AND if my current gear is good enough to allow me to win, I'll stick to it until others have caught up or the goal post have moved further with improvment of technology. Witness the Ferrari F1 team. For years in 80s and 90s, they've come up with a new "revolutionary" F1 car every season, only to be walked over by McLarens and Williams with their "evolutionary" cars. Now they've finally got a winning car they're sticking to it until other's have caught up, before they roll out the new one. Why change your winning way for sake of using something new? New things often means unproven. And if a new equipment has the potential to change your winning way, why change?
ok. now as the title of this thread suggest, why don't Yonex paint the top pros racket to look like the latest models but in actual fact, the rackets are still the old models which they used? Tennis does that!
Thanks for your views. I am aware that pros probably prefer their old rackets. So why don't the racket companies allow them to continue using their old rackets (eg Ti10), but just paint them to look like the latest models (eg Armortec700)? The big 4 tennis companies have been doing it for years for the top pros they endorse. Its a known "secret" but nobody's suing them!
When I read your idea in the first post, immediatly false advertising popped up. Can you give us any proof/pictures/facts that tennis is doing it?
Go to tenniswarehouse.com. I've been following the discussions there for almost four years. Read the message boards. They are all over the place. But I guess you'll need to use the search function too.
i'm glad our board is so much more organized! this is an interesting topic.. i never knew they would do something like this.
Now the question is then, do they (the manufacturers) now claim that the pro uses model X (when it is either some customized model or another model painted to look like model X)? If so, then there is a very good case for false adverstising. It is different if the manufacturers claim that model X is endorsed by pro Y.
Just to kick off, here are just a couple of discussions on Roger Federer's racket alone: Some even have pics of his actual racket. http://talk.tennis-warehouse.com/discussions?13@223.M3SKaNL0lvN^32@.eea157e http://talk.tennis-warehouse.com/discussions?13@223.M3SKaNL0lvN^20@.eeacf71/0 http://talk.tennis-warehouse.com/discussions?13@223.M3SKaNL0lvN^25@.eeab051/0 http://talk.tennis-warehouse.com/discussions?14@223.M3SKaNL0lvN^40@.eea95e5/0
BTW, I think badminton players in general are more honest in that if the vendor suggest to Camilla or Peter Gade to have a paint job over their Ti-10/Slim 10, I betcha that they will probably throw the fella who made the suggestion out on his butt!