btw, since i am one of these "inferior" badminton players taneepak mentions about who grew up in a milieu of plastics, let me just say that nobody I know including me ONLY uses plastics. also, some of my friends probably wouldn't continue playing badminton if it wasn't for plastics since they, being high school students, do not have the budget for only buying these "superior" feathers which they wreck so easily. sometimes, we just want to escape the pressures of the arduous AP and IB exams and do something else; we would bang around a nylon birdie for fun however we all keep a personal feather birdie collection that we use every now and then and the use of nylons alone does not denounce us as poor players!! (there's more factors as to why we suck)
also, both sides make good points however this conflict mimics the struggles between the leftists and the rightists of politics. there will never be a middle road!! i say we just leave it as such and go on our separate ways.. instead of tediously blathering on and on about such a trivial matter until hell freezes over, we should all just go out and enjoy the game, plastics or not! time is way too short for this nonsense
What a load of cr*p .. selection when it comes to shuttles (both plastic and feathers) are hardly something for NA and EU to brag about, compared to asian countries.. As often you are contradicting youreself , if it is a such a small adaption as you so often claim they will look highly skilled using plastic.. Irrellevant as you can't prove the oppsite to be true.. I don't think there is a single example of anyone who used plastic exclusively up to senior play, that would stand even a slight chance against the top pros (regardless of what type of shuttle used).. Tpaak can at least "proove" that players brought up on a diet of feather-shuttles can become top-notch players.. You can claim that the same can be achived with plastic shuttles, but this has not been proved as I see it.. I is plausible, but nevertheless hasn't happened yet.. yes, but the point is moot, as it would be even more economical to re-use plastics.. I could see plenty of reasons.. a) they don't care about shuttle performance b) it is more commonly available with the plastic shuttles in the stores c) as you mentioned many times it is har to find shuttles with correct speed (availability again). d) They have lived there whole ádult life in Candade, and had limnited exposure to good shuttles.. I don't get your point? Should asians living or imigrating to Sweden, EU, NA have different preferences in shuttles, compared to other players in these countries?? I think the preference is more about how you view the sport of badminton, and what skill, level you play (or want to play) at.. I don't see why it should be any difference between what race you are?!?! /Twobeer
u dunno the history of this debate. I never said plastic play the same as feather shuttle. A shuttle, whether it is made of paper or anything, is just a standard choosen by by side of the players to use. If both side use the same 'ball', the game become who has the best skills since both sides use the same shuttle. However, some feather players think because they play feather, they are automatically better skilled than plastic players. Plastic players never refuse a match using feather, unlike some feather players refuse to play it saying it is not the standard. If it is not the standard, i wonder why Yonex makes them, or BWF try to introduce plastic shuttles into tournaments, only frown down upon by fulltime feather players.
With this skewed logic playing with using a macaroni as "shuttle" would be "ok".. and the most "skilled" player would win..same for both players... But it would really just tell who is the most skilled player playing the "macaroni"-ton game... /Twobeer
how can plastic players become pros when bwf doesn't sanction plastic shuttles in high ranking tournaments? To achieve something, one aim for a target and the target now is feather shuttle. Those asians the immigrated to canada and adopted mavis shuttles have lived their adult back home in asia. They are quite proficient feather players before arriving canada. I didn't say all do that, i say big bib portion of asian badminton switched to mavis where i lived. Sure they care about shuttle performance, that is why they like mavis because they don't degrade flight performance after every hit. Mavis retain flight performance much longer than feather.
By your argumetn it should not be a problem for these skilled players to easilly adapt to feather shuttles and win... I'll take your word for it.. But my personal experience is that the asian players coming here, are much more keen to play feathers, than recreational native europeans.. Maybe it is different in Canada.. But your views that asians begins to like plastic when emigrating, is not my experience.. /T
at no time i've said people like plastic over feather. u r just nick picking small bit of wording of my posts here and there, not on about my general argument.
That's not my experience in Vancouver. Most players here play with feather, except for recreational players at the community centre level. Maybe the crowd in Calgary is a bit different.
in Hong Kong, pretty much all sports stores that sells badminton stuff, including the specialized ones, stock both plastic as well as feather shuttle.
from what i can tell, Calgary and maybe Toronto are the exception. they tend to play more with plastic, while almost everywhere else, the US, Asia, and Europe are much more feather oriented. Calgary, as cooler has mentioned various times before, require use of very slow grade shuttle, can the availability of the speed 46 feather be a factor in choosing plastic over feather?
That is highly possible. 4.6 grams shuttlecocks may not last as long as 5.2 grams ones. So, the situation comes back to economics in the end. And I have no idea of the situation in Toronto. Can someone fill us in? In the meantime gentlemen, let's relax and enjoy Canadian taxpayers' contribution to CBC: http://www.cbc.ca/radio2/channels/popup.html?stream=classical
yes, that could be the main reason: 1. Correct speed here is 4.6 - 4.7g feathers, very hard to get. Can't buy bulk. Correct speed is AS20 speed 00 in the summer. In winter, we can use yonex speed 0. Even if we buy other brands with slow speed rating, the feather shuttle don't fly in correct speed as they claimed. I still got alot of tronex with 74 speed rating that fly like 78. 2. Even with speed 0 yonex or 48 of other brands, we have to tip the feathers so we basically wreck the shuttle before we even start playing. 3. I also guess that some shuttle makers may use 'lighter' weight feathers in making slow shuttle. One can't just use lighter cork because it would offset the balance of the shuttle if we want them to tumble the same way.
thx for the link i like to add another reason why north american still not breaking loose from plastic. U see, all the feather playing dominated regions have REAL badminton courts and facilities. IE good lighting, good floor, and GOOD background contrast. What is the point of playing expensive feathers on crappy floor, crappy lighting and WHITE walls and ceiling? At least mavis 300 come in yellow. I think i have nailed it. Would taneepak order fresh dim sum as takeout, and eat it with plastic fork, inside his car or around the parking lot? That is why people buy 'FAST' food from takeout and not steak and lobster from McDonald. I think people would appreciate feathers if they can play on real courts. Taneepak say one can't appreciate full badminton with plastic. Well, just switching to feather but still stuck with crappy floor, lighting, walls, feather alone doesn't give u the full badminton experience. I would say ~100% plastic clubs play on rented school gyms, with white walls and ceiling. Just go check, i can say ~100% feather clubs have proper baddy courts. summary: availability of correct speed shuttles and/or proper courts are the key key reasons why NA is slow to adopt feathers.
again. as far as i can tell, and as my previous post says. most of N. America have adopted feathers already except for Calgary and Toronto. trying to generalize Calgary and Toronto to be "N. America" is a bit too far fetched.
i mean at all level, school, recreational and advance. We have already heard that all NA schools use plastic. When i said NA, i mean on a broader sense, not just club players. toronto was a plastic town but recent clubs like flying dragon, mandarin and lees are changing the shuttle preference. Here is some facts, In Toronto, there are still 228 clubs registered with the Ontario Badminton Association, which majority are operated within rented school, community and church hall gyms. In calgary, we only have 11 proper (private clubs, wooden floors, we have no mats period) badminton courts, the rest are played on rented school gyms, and recreational centres which are multi function. As a point, here is the private calgary winter club, which has 5 of the 11 real badminton courts in calgary, advertising Kim Dong Moon badminton academy, have a look at the webpage http://www.calgarywinterclub.com/Default.aspx?p=DynamicModule&pageid=267143&ssid=134496&vnf=1 ENTRANCE FEE: Current Entrance Fee is $30,000.00. Annual Dues Shareholder $1525.00 Spouse $514.00 Ages 25-29 (on parents account) $925.00 Ages 18-24 (on parents account) $425.00 Dependent Child (0 - 17 years) $313.00 *Family Senior (65+yrs) $313.00 Facility Improvement Fund $240.00 KDM is extra
at a broader level, most cities have plastic and feathers players. so we cannot generalize that way. as I mentioned, even in the UK, schools are using plastic too. esp since the preference of plastic is not by choice, but by economics. for situation that have both financial and climate freedom, where players are not limited by budgets as well as air pressure concern, we see that the majority of players, even in N. America have already adopted feathers. i just want to point out that i am not trying to claim which one is better, i am just trying to state what i think is the trend.
well, i borrowed that generalization from twobeer and taneepak, which i have to admit i gave them the benefit of the doubt.
