As someone who used to use a panhandle grip for a lot of overhead shots I can tell you that it is BAD. There is one simple reason: You can't hit the shuttle down! It just does not work biomechanically for downward overhead shots. Raise your racket in the air like you're about to hit a smash and then try to angle the racket downwards without letting your contact point drop. The only way is to make your wrist flop forwards, which is a very weak position for the wrist. You should never have your wrist in this position while hitting a power stroke--you will not get any power and you may injure yourself. You should always have your wrist back or neutral, but never forwards. When I used to use this grip, it was because I learned how to play on extremely slow plastic shuttles, where you had to smash the bird upwards in order to hit a full length clear. However, I could not hit a steep smash, and at best could only hit extremely flat ones that would have gone out the back if I had been playing with a correct speed shuttle. The advantages to using a panhandle grip are attractive to beginners, but do not make up for the inability to hit the shuttle down (the most important aspect of attacking strokes). The main advantage is that you get better control (the shuttle flies in the same direction as the direction your body is facing due to the angle it makes with your arm), but you can easily develop the same level of control by practicing the correct grip. The only time you should be using a completely panhandle grip is when you are taking the shuttle far in front of you on the forehand side (drives or pushes) or far behind you on the backhand side (defensive backhand from the rearcourt). Also, keep in mind that you should constantly be adjusting and changing your grip. That is the purpose of your grip, to give you the correct angle to hit your shot based on where the shuttle is in relation to your body. The goal is to keep your wrist in a strong position while maintaining square contact with the shuttle. Therefore, for overhead clears, you may want to adjust your grip slightly towards panhandle to give you a better upwards angle. For overhead smashes, drops, or clips, you should adjust more towards basic to give you more angle downwards. For forehand drives in front, use panhandle. For drives to the side, adjust your grip more towards basic. Once you understand the principle, implementing it is quite simple.
@Saperzim: I notice you did not care to address the points I made on pan handle discussion and only addressed points 'off topic'. p.s. If you are going to use physics equations, it's probably best if you don't get momentum and (kinetic) energy mixed up with power, which are all different entities.
Funny (or sad) thing that I see these beginners who have played a few years you can tell they've never been properly coached... they use this grip and they are pounding the bird with absolutely no pronation at all. And more often than not, they're wearing these elbow and sleeve tensors because they've suffered from repetitive stress injuries from you guessed it... improper technique. Bottom line and take home message: You can't play badminton properly if you don't use pronation. And you can't use pronation if you don't use a proper grip. Simple and easy as that.
I haven't even read all the arguments so far but all I know is this idea is a fail. From what I've seen, the closest thing you can have to panhandle is like having the normal grip, but having your thumb more wrapped around the hand. I think Gollum talks about this in his article of grips and variations. I haven't seen a picture so I'm not completely sure if we're talking about the same thing. Lee Jae Bok talks about this too for smashing Now if you go full out panhandle you're going to have a lot of problems. As visor said, all I have to do is warm up with you doing clears and you'll be out of energy for the game Of course you could post a video...
P = MV is true. 1/2 MV*V as momentum is responsible to generate power per many racket litreture. please expand your "view"
It seems like "One Badminton Member Player" standing up for the partner Badminton player. Good chemistry but misplaced stand. Further demonstration of how limited view and understanding of the physics behind badminton you also have Ok here it is ... Think about you are playing badminton .. Your opponent hit shuttle in your side and in split second you hit the birdie back .. in this split second 2 distinct things happen 1) You located the birdie .. took your racket swing towards the birdie (yes in the grip you like .. not necessarily panhandle style) HINT : Kinetic energy 1/2 MV*V comes into picture where M = mass of racket and V is swing speed 2) You made contact with the shuttle and M1 * V1 = M2 * V2 equation comes picture So in both steps mass (weight) of racket and swing speed play part. Needless to say (pay attention please) … step 1 ie Kinetic energy will be favorable for lite rackets (compare to heavy rackets) step 2 ie Momentum and Collision would be favorable to Heavy rackets (compare to lite rackets) but Step 1 (Swing Velocity) output which is input in Step 2 (Swing Hit Momentum) is the final output (power on shuttle). So Step 1 * Step 2 has to be Optimized. The Optimization is different based on each player and hence headlite / head heavy / Even Balanced as well as 3U / 4U rackets in use by different players. That’s why we Don’t use Tennis rackets in Badminton as too heavy to create final power on shuttle. That’s why 2U is becoming obsolete and so is 3U on way with 4U+ becoming more popular as evolution. I don’t need physics lesson but you may want to read the links below Kinetic Energy --- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy Momentum --- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Momentum SZ P.S. I don’t have problem with opposing views which Mseeley & others did it with right reasons. It’s the attitude of few members (you know who) while replying to newbie like me ... want to make sure to keep it in check J
I give up... I must be dense or something, because I read the post above twice, and didn't understand what you're trying to say.
agree. Ulnar Deviation, which panhandle grip uses, has a limited range. I tried observing my own and at best i can get around 80 degree of movement. there are two issue from this: - a larger range allows force to be applied for longer duration, which result in more energy transferred to the racket - such limited range means dexterity is also limited and thus when under non-ideal situation, like the shuttle well behind our back, it is much harder to dig those shots out while normal grip, using pronation, i get 180 degree of motion, which allows for much longer time to accelerate the racket. - more energy is transferred to the racket - enables "wrist shot" when under pressure
Typically it's the other way around -- at least for clears vs. smashes. A "normal" clear has a contact point directly above your racket shoulder; a "normal" smash has a contact point slightly out in front. Therefore a slight change towards panhandle is effective for the smash (to avoid slicing the shuttle). But it's only slight. You can think of it like this: the smash is between a out-in-front drive (panhandle) and a clear (basic), and it's much closer to the clear. Of course, there are many different situations. A punch clear can use a slight panhandle, whereas a stick smash taken behind the body can adjust the other way, towards a thumb grip. Did you mean wrist flexion? Ulnar deviation is the "karate chop" style movement, which reduces the angle between the little finger and the forearm.
This would be very helpful for clarification. The most unorthodox grip at present in top flight would be Wang Shi Xian's. That's fairly, but not fully panhandle with a bit of a hammer grip. I can't say it's a trend.
Another thing if the panhandle grip is more suited to lighter racquets, then we should be seeing more of them in common use at top level badminton now. Racquets have become progressively lighter since the days of wooden racquets -> steel -> carbon graphite -> various materials of present day. But do we see panhandle grip becoming more prevalent in top class badminton?
Sorry not big on my physics What is this referring to in real life? What I assumed you are trying to say is that m1 and v1 are referring to the racket and m2 and v2 would refer to the shuttle? But when I used the formula I got ridiculous figure for shuttle speed(v2?) For instance if I were to swing a 88g(0.088kg) racket at say a lowly 50mph(22.35m/s). Using a shuttle weight in the average of the rules about 5g(0.005kg) so m1 = 0.088 v1 = 22.35 m2 = 0.005 your equation m1*v1=m2*v2 0.088*22.35 = 0.005*v2 1.96 = 0.005*v2 v2 = 393.36m/s which = about 880mph that's pretty fast. Obviously I am getting the wrong end of the stick can you correct me please with regards to your equation meanings.
M1 should be much smaller as it's the head of the racquet. There's also loss of energy due to sound generation, suboptimal impact, damping etc (not sure what exactly what 'etc' also includes).
Even give the lighter weight of head only, the figures still crazy. What is this formula? and how is it related/useful for badminton calculations?
If you use conservation of kinetic energy equation, then 37g head, 50mph swing speed, 5g shuttle, then shuttle speed is 136mph. Assuming no other losses from friction, sound generation, etc as Cheung mentioned.
It's conservation of momentum, so you have to take the system as a whole ie the system is the racket + the shuttle If you hit the shuttle from a dangling string (ie the shuttle is not moving before you hit it), then you get this equation p_racket_before = p_racket_after + p_shuttle_after (p = momentum = mv) So you can't say anything about the shuttle speed unless you know how much the racket slowed down after impact.
