Panhandle Grip to Play (New Approach to adopt with Superlite Rackets) for Future

Discussion in 'Techniques / Training' started by Superzoom, May 12, 2013.

  1. visor

    visor Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,401
    Likes Received:
    2,001
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    [MENTION=2233]Gollum[/MENTION]

    Interesting point you make about the contact point and grip changes. I think we all non beginners do this instinctively without thinking during play. Once you have your correct basic stroke mechanics, you will automatically adjust your grip to control the angle of the racket face relative to contact point, where you are on court, and where you want to hit to.

    Which is more important: proper grip or proper stroke?
    I suppose this is like the chicken and egg question.

    Both are just as important because you can't have one without the other. :)
     
    #61 visor, May 17, 2013
    Last edited: May 17, 2013
  2. amleto

    amleto Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    2,890
    Likes Received:
    89
    Location:
    UK
    I don't know how else to say, all of the calculations done here are not correct because they assume all of the energy/momentum from the racket goes into the shuttle. Some have seen that the answers are ridiculous when using the full racket mass so they think the solution is to pick a number at random (the mass of the racket head), and try again and see what comes out.

    It doesn't matter what numbers are picked, the problem that everyone seems intent on solving is the wrong one!

    I did point those interested in the correct direction by linking to the elastic collisions wiki page. No one cared to plug their numbers into the equations I suggested, though.
     
  3. Cheung

    Cheung Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    23,818
    Likes Received:
    4,791
    Occupation:
    wannabe badminton phototaker
    Location:
    Outside the box
    LOL, And Yonex could be wrong..
     
  4. visor

    visor Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,401
    Likes Received:
    2,001
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    Nah... with their r&d, I doubt that we know any better than them... ;)
     
  5. 96382

    96382 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Messages:
    62
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    homeland
    Someone with some free PhD time could do a finite elements simulation for that situation ;-)
    Paper? (Aerodynamics - p.53 http://tinyurl.com/b28x6em)
     
  6. 96382

    96382 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2007
    Messages:
    62
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    homeland
  7. craigandy

    craigandy Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    2,363
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    UK
    Say it by showing me the proper calculations with numbers and an explanation along with it or wait untill someone else can. Thanks
     
  8. amleto

    amleto Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    2,890
    Likes Received:
    89
    Location:
    UK
  9. craigandy

    craigandy Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2011
    Messages:
    2,363
    Likes Received:
    19
    Location:
    UK
    I can't see any numbers relating to badminton or any explanations about the numbers used with regards to badminton on that page. It's just a wiki page with elastic collision equations. How do I know what numbers to enter into those equations? you said I got the wrong numbers so whats the point. No help. Thanks anyway appreciate it.
     
  10. amleto

    amleto Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    2,890
    Likes Received:
    89
    Location:
    UK
    You read the wiki section - it explains what goes where...

    Capture.JPG
    Actually you can say m2 is the shuttle, and u2 = 0 to simplify things.

    It's still not that accurate, though because the racket motion is not really linear - angular momentum should be considered.
     
    #70 amleto, May 18, 2013
    Last edited: May 18, 2013
  11. Line & Length

    Line & Length Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 9, 2010
    Messages:
    220
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    Worcestershire
    Given the constraints of the principle of conservation of linear momentum (PCLM) and assuming that the racket is very heavy relative to the shuttle and that the shuttle isn't moving appreciably horizontally, then a purely elastic collision would result in a shuttle speed of twice the racket head speed.

    Given that any collision is not going to be fully elastic & that the racket head isn't infinity massive relative to the shuttle, I think 70mph off a head-speed of 50mph is plausible.

    As the racket head gets lighter, then the head speed will increase. However, due to the PCLM, the 'speed multiplication' ratio will worsen. I would suggest that there's an optimum head weight which will differ for each player. Too light and there will be insufficient momentum to transfer much impulse. Too heavy & the head speed will suffer.
     
  12. amleto

    amleto Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    2,890
    Likes Received:
    89
    Location:
    UK
    Given that a racket swing isn't linear by a long shot, conservation of linear momentum alone doesn't do you much good.
     
  13. Superzoom

    Superzoom Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2012
    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    US
    Good insights shared by visor, amleto, CA, LL and other folks of “analyzing split second shuttle hit and what happens to generate power as output result”.
    We all have right approach & Logic as well intuitively understand in real life but completely articulating it in mathematical models as well as using physics equation to exact ‘predication of shuttle speed’ is something required lot of resources (skills, equipment’s, money etc) which only professional entity like Yonex or Adidas or some national level Badminton sports organization (say China, Japan, Indonesia or Malasia) could only do it.
    But to revise this approach on further logical lines

    1. Player’s (Body) ability to Generate “Kinetic Energy” on the similar basis of “Maximum Power Transfer Theorem : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_power_transfer_theorem

    Now it’s used for electric motor but then at the end of day our Body is also “Motor”. We use our internal (chemical?) energy to convert into actions (think about footsteps, hand actions, swings etc).

    Observation : As each player is different in terms of body / Stamina / Strength … while holding racket (primarily weight of racket)while “creating KE = ½ MV**2” from internal chemical body energy using similar Body Motor principal (Maximum Power Transfer Theorem) would react different.

    Too heavy racket and we get tired quckly while playing. Too lite and we feel like we are not “maximizing” our body strength. There is optimum point between multiple M and V points (individual players vary) which gives different selection of racket weight.

    Fact : Racket weight plays important role in this Step 1 (impacting on KE & V for a given M)


    1. With KE generation having “InElastic Collision” on Shuttle and momentum equations. Unfortunately lof ot variables missing or has to be considered (as Cheug) pointed out as “energy transfer” get allocated into multiple events (like shuttle sped, shuttle spin, sound generation as well as “angle of collision (think about straight line hitting or slicing shuttle or at angle etc)
    Fact : Panhandle gives more chance of “Maximum Energy Transfer”.
    Fact : Player’s Technique is also important (not to be confused with panhandle grip J) in terms of contact area (sweet-spot).

    If we observe how many of us do the “normal grip like’ activity using hand in real life to maximize body outputs while doing physical activity. How many of us write on paper (for 3 hours straight) using “forehand grip on pen / pencil. Majority of us would use Panhandle grip right J ?

    May be Forehand grip was useful when “more than natural ability power generation” was required in the past (think about Heavy wooden Rackets). So the grip was invented. So there is a reason why beginners use Panhandle grip (without coaching instructions) as our Human body Instinct selects as more natural alignment of body action for Maximum Power Theorem principal (without realizing all the technical mumbo jumbo what we are discussing so far ).

    But ultimately when given opportunity our body (Human Evolution Tendency) will go back to natural body moments which are based on Horizontal & Vertical as major movement with occasional twist (angle adjustments).

    From that perspective with lighter racket why Panhandle grip seems like natural alignment with Body movement of daily life and may have to be considered.

    Before someone jump on this lacking power in pand-handle style … Here is my argument … Pros use High string tension because although it gives less power but they get more control using in forehand grip.

    Well here you go you got alternative now where you can use Panhandle grip keep low tension (say 20-22) but with excellent control with Maximum Power Theorem usage, natural body alignment (hence ability to take / return shuttle) and ability to take Shuttle Early (Gaining on TIME) in the game.

    • TIME is such important dimension and it’s impact in game ... I will write separate post for it.

    SZ
     
  14. amleto

    amleto Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    2,890
    Likes Received:
    89
    Location:
    UK
    saying 'fact', doesn't make it so.

    I've got no idea how you think a pan handle grip gives more chance of “Maximum Energy Transfer” when you already admit that pan handle cannot provide as much power as basic grip. Are you listening to yourself?!

    This is not even mentioning the fact that the theory has no relevance for energy transfer between a bird and a bat.

    This excellent control has come out of thin air I presume? Sorry, I suppose it is one of your 'facts'.

    I'm actually starting to hope you're a troll. If not, I feel bad for you, bro.
     
    #74 amleto, May 18, 2013
    Last edited: May 18, 2013
  15. Superzoom

    Superzoom Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2012
    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    US
    Ok quick question … ( I wanted to keep it focused on Panhandle grip style but just to highlight it with Forehand style grip comparison .. it makes sense).

    We all know that ‘almost all Pros’ at international level (true for National / club / advanced level also) use HIGH STRING TENTION to get better control while sacrificing on power (which they overcompensate using superior physical strength & fitness).

    Now WHY IS THAT ? * Please take it as fundamental thinking on different level .. WHY ? *

    I mean by all definitions they are Elite PROs .. Many years of multiple hours daily practice with excellent preparation and understanding of the game.

    So * Control * should be the last thing they need to THINK or OVERCOMPENATE by going above manufacturing limits up to 30/32/34 etc.

    So given choice at least “some if not all’ should go the other way around and lower the tension to stay within limit and get POWER AMPED Up (at ‘relatively lower tension’ compare to 30-34 string tension)

    Yet everybody is going for HIGH STRING TENSION. By the way all are Forehand Grip style player J

    Now is it possible they think given a choice between POWER VS CONTROL . .their forehand grip NEED HELP on CONTROL ? (despite years of practice & preparation with forehand grip?)

    I am curious if anybody (including amleto) could explain the contradictions of HIGH STRING TENSION where as everybody agrees “Deep Penetrating Shots” (MORE POWER) would win the game :)


    P.S. You may want to correlate my earlier post context of “Natural Body Movement & Panhandle grip”

    SZ
     
  16. amleto

    amleto Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    2,890
    Likes Received:
    89
    Location:
    UK
    You are attributing too much power differential to string tension. As long as you can A) flex the strings, and B) hit the sweet spot (reduces with higher tension), you get full power. So if you can do A) & B) whilst increasing tension then you are not losing any power - only gaining control!
     
  17. visor

    visor Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2009
    Messages:
    16,401
    Likes Received:
    2,001
    Location:
    Vancouver, BC
    this panhandle grip discussion is not going anywhere if you don't recognize that proper badminton stroke technique require forearm pronation/supination (hence the basic grip)

    ... you can't be using wrist flexion/extension (as you would with panhandle grip) all the time because that would cause injury to your wrist over time

    don't be like those beginner aunts and uncles wearing wrist and elbow tensors that i see at the courts using this improper stroke... you're smarter than that... you're on this BC forum, being helped out by so many coaches and advanced players... please just think perhaps all these players who are trying to help you may know something you don't

    i admire your enthusiasm shown in your posts, but really you're trying to reinvent the wheel without having any knowledge of the basics

    now can we please get back to the KE and P calculations? :D
     
    #77 visor, May 18, 2013
    Last edited: May 18, 2013
  18. amleto

    amleto Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    2,890
    Likes Received:
    89
    Location:
    UK
  19. Superzoom

    Superzoom Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 26, 2012
    Messages:
    42
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    US
     
  20. demolidor

    demolidor Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2003
    Messages:
    5,507
    Likes Received:
    127
    Location:
    @Hollanti
    Kwun should add a thumbs down button just in this thread :rolleyes:
     

Share This Page