switching over from plastic to feathers

[Smasher Dobson]

Ok guys - all's well.

I beleive there is something about this in the rules of badminton that the shuttle should be able to travel from baseline to baseline with an underhand shot?

That way you can choose the right shuttle for your atmospheric conditions etc etc.

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by bananakid

My way of communication is to get to the point and not go around in circle especially when dealing with people who likes to bring up excuses and whine about this and that just to heal the wounds in their little egos.

You can dislike my tone, but can you disagree with the actual meaning/point of my previous post in this thread?

I've never been one to mince words either, so I respect your commitment to being straightforward and honest:

Originally Posted by Keats

"Beauty is truth, truth beauty," -- that is all
Ye know on earth, and all ye need to know.

It's a fine and elevated sentiment.

Yet I feel you're using this as an excuse for being rude. You are presenting a choice between "politeness" and "honesty" -- as though these traits are mutually exclusive. They are not. It's not difficult to be polite, honest, and direct.

I suggest you ask yourself, "What is my role on these forums? Why do I choose to come here?" In the past, when I've become involved in unpleasant arguments, I've asked myself those questions too; answering them has changed my behaviour.

Sometimes the answers are not edifying: they may reveal a side of yourself that you don't like. And therein lies the challenge: can you, who pride yourself on holding up a harsh mirror to other people's flaws, look upon your own reflection without flinching? Can you recognise aspects of your character that are unappealing, and remove them while retaining your other good qualities?

It's not an easy process. It takes time -- like training for badminton. Here are some things I've learned from examining my own flaws:


What follows is not a criticism of you. It's a criticism of me!

Feeling the need to "prove" yourself can be dangerous. It often causes you to become over-involved in the discussion, such that you treat it personally. It can make you intolerant of disagreement -- you may feel the need to "force" your views on other people.

Being right is not enough; you also need to be considerate of other people. Shouting at people, or insulting them, is not a good method of persuasion. If your goal is to show off, then it works; but if you actually want to help people learn, you must treat them with courtesy.

Even when you know you're right, people will often disagree. When you're passionate about a subject, it can be frustrating that people refuse to listen to your excellent advice. Don't take it personally; don't interpret it as a failure on your part. Just accept that people are independent entities, who have to make their own decisions -- even when those decisions are wrong. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

And don't forget that you can be wrong too. No one is right all the time.

For what it's worth, this is how I now see my role on these forums: I come here to offer advice, and I'm happy that people often find it helpful. As I no longer feel a need to "prove" myself, I'm comfortable with people disagreeing with me. I am a teacher, but I don't want slaves for students: I want intelligent, independent human beings who have the confidence to question or disregard my advice.

And sometimes, I just like to go off on a tangent such as this post -- because I enjoy thinking and writing.

And sometimes I even learn something new from other people.

Most of all, I prefer my involvement to be in the spirit of cooperation, and not in the spirit of confrontation. That is a choice I have made, and I attempt to keep myself to it. You have the same choice before you, as we all do. It's about how you choose to interact with people. It's about virtue.

[Gollum]

Originally Posted by Smasher Dobson

I beleive there is something about this in the rules of badminton that the shuttle should be able to travel from baseline to baseline with an underhand shot?

That way you can choose the right shuttle for your atmospheric conditions etc etc.

That's right. The test is to strike the shuttle from above the baseline, with a full underhand stroke. It should land a short distance either side of the doubles service line (the better courts have testing marks in the correct places).

Playing with shuttles that are much too fast or much too slow greatly changes the game (more than the difference between plastic and feather).

[forgeron]

Originally Posted by Gollum

In my experience, playing with plastics does alter the game substantially. Players with fairly poor technique are still able to hit monstrous smashes, and everyone has an end-to-end backhand clear. Sliced shots become less effective, and the many of the subtler touches around the net cease to work.

I must be the worst player in the world then!


Good video on testing shuttles.


http://badminton-coach.co.uk/274/tes...oaching-video/

[chewablemorphin]

Originally Posted by Gollum

That's right. The test is to strike the shuttle from above the baseline, with a full underhand stroke. It should land a short distance either side of the doubles service line (the better courts have testing marks in the correct places).

Playing with shuttles that are much too fast or much too slow greatly changes the game (more than the difference between plastic and feather).

Nylon shuttles should be at the line when tested. The main difference between them is the dynamics of flight. You cannot strike a feather bird with any more force than you strike a nylon. Feather birds decelerate at a faster rate than a nylon. There are many types of both feather and nylons and each have very specific rates of deceleration, many being good, and many being bad.

[cooler]

well, everybody has their likes and dislikes about feather and plastic shuttles. I like plastic because of its consistency and durability. I like feather because it is easy to hit (maybe due to our lightweighted 74 speed shuttles) and not worry too much about hitting it out so i can hit it hard blindly. Someone here like feathers because of its natural oil.

[majyun]

Originally Posted by Gollum

I've never been one to mince words either, so I respect your commitment to being straightforward and honest:



It's a fine and elevated sentiment.

Yet I feel you're using this as an excuse for being rude. You are presenting a choice between "politeness" and "honesty" -- as though these traits are mutually exclusive. They are not. It's not difficult to be polite, honest, and direct.

I suggest you ask yourself, "What is my role on these forums? Why do I choose to come here?" In the past, when I've become involved in unpleasant arguments, I've asked myself those questions too; answering them has changed my behaviour.

Sometimes the answers are not edifying: they may reveal a side of yourself that you don't like. And therein lies the challenge: can you, who pride yourself on holding up a harsh mirror to other people's flaws, look upon your own reflection without flinching? Can you recognise aspects of your character that are unappealing, and remove them while retaining your other good qualities?

It's not an easy process. It takes time -- like training for badminton. Here are some things I've learned from examining my own flaws:


What follows is not a criticism of you. It's a criticism of me!

Feeling the need to "prove" yourself can be dangerous. It often causes you to become over-involved in the discussion, such that you treat it personally. It can make you intolerant of disagreement -- you may feel the need to "force" your views on other people.

Being right is not enough; you also need to be considerate of other people. Shouting at people, or insulting them, is not a good method of persuasion. If your goal is to show off, then it works; but if you actually want to help people learn, you must treat them with courtesy.

Even when you know you're right, people will often disagree. When you're passionate about a subject, it can be frustrating that people refuse to listen to your excellent advice. Don't take it personally; don't interpret it as a failure on your part. Just accept that people are independent entities, who have to make their own decisions -- even when those decisions are wrong. You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

And don't forget that you can be wrong too. No one is right all the time.

For what it's worth, this is how I now see my role on these forums: I come here to offer advice, and I'm happy that people often find it helpful. As I no longer feel a need to "prove" myself, I'm comfortable with people disagreeing with me. I am a teacher, but I don't want slaves for students: I want intelligent, independent human beings who have the confidence to question or disregard my advice.

And sometimes, I just like to go off on a tangent such as this post -- because I enjoy thinking and writing.

And sometimes I even learn something new from other people.

Most of all, I prefer my involvement to be in the spirit of cooperation, and not in the spirit of confrontation. That is a choice I have made, and I attempt to keep myself to it. You have the same choice before you, as we all do. It's about how you choose to interact with people. It's about virtue.

a brilliant, awesome and well-thought post. Salute to you, good sir!

[DanhNguyen5.3]

Originally Posted by chewablemorphin

All I see is a person who is blaming equipment for a loss. A person with 1/16th of a brain can comprehend this. If you rely on a single weakness, clearly there are holes in your game you can work on. How about using another strategy?

What does chewablemorphin imply to you? I wanted to change it to "Seal Clubber" but I don't know how

sorry dude I'm with the other guy right now, like looks maybe if that guy has only one weakness, thats it, thats all he needs to lose, it doesn't matter if he has good drop smash or anything , if he has that one weakness, he can lose, and it doens't look like the gys your fighting with can beat him without that one weakness, well is true by the plastic birdie by the fact he lost, if his opponent doesn't have that one weakness, is like there is no more wekaness he can find to beat him, and that wouldn't happen if they didn't change birdies.

so is not that he has lack of skills, is that his opponent gain a advantage by the change of birdies, is like he has a gun, and he's skilled using one, and his opponent has one gun, but just been handed another gun, overall he would lose.

saying if his opponent learn how to hit back to back court with feather birdies, meaning from what he said , he would lose from lack of skill, and cannot blame equipments

[DanhNguyen5.3]

Originally Posted by chewablemorphin

All I see is a person who is blaming equipment for a loss. A person with 1/16th of a brain can comprehend this. If you rely on a single weakness, clearly there are holes in your game you can work on. How about using another strategy?

What does chewablemorphin imply to you? I wanted to change it to "Seal Clubber" but I don't know how

sorry dude I'm with the other guy right now, like looks maybe if that guy has only one weakness, thats it, thats all he needs to lose, it doesn't matter if he has good drop smash or anything , if he has that one weakness, he can lose, and it doens't look like the gys your fighting with can beat him without that one weakness, well is true by the plastic birdie by the fact he lost, if his opponent doesn't have that one weakness, is like there is no more wekaness he can find to beat him, and that wouldn't happen if they didn't change birdies.

so is not that he has lack of skills, is that his opponent gain a advantage by the change of birdies, is like he has a gun, and he's skilled using one, and his opponent has one gun, but just been handed another gun, overall he would lose.

saying if his opponent learn how to hit back to back court with feather birdies, meaning from what he said , he would lose from lack of skill, and cannot blame equipments

[chewablemorphin]

Originally Posted by DanhNguyen5.3

sorry dude I'm with the other guy right now, like looks maybe if that guy has only one weakness, thats it, thats all he needs to lose, it doesn't matter if he has good drop smash or anything , if he has that one weakness, he can lose, and it doens't look like the gys your fighting with can beat him without that one weakness, well is true by the plastic birdie by the fact he lost, if his opponent doesn't have that one weakness, is like there is no more wekaness he can find to beat him, and that wouldn't happen if they didn't change birdies.

so is not that he has lack of skills, is that his opponent gain a advantage by the change of birdies, is like he has a gun, and he's skilled using one, and his opponent has one gun, but just been handed another gun, overall he would lose.

saying if his opponent learn how to hit back to back court with feather birdies, meaning from what he said , he would lose from lack of skill, and cannot blame equipments

The change between feather and nylon shuttles does not change the skill level of a player using them. If it's this one weakness they have, maybe they are playing with feather birds that are too slow? You are not capable of striking a feather bird with any more force than a nylon.

[cooler]

Originally Posted by DanhNguyen5.3

sorry dude I'm with the other guy right now, like looks maybe if that guy has only one weakness, thats it, thats all he needs to lose, it doesn't matter if he has good drop smash or anything , if he has that one weakness, he can lose, and it doens't look like the gys your fighting with can beat him without that one weakness, well is true by the plastic birdie by the fact he lost, if his opponent doesn't have that one weakness, is like there is no more wekaness he can find to beat him, and that wouldn't happen if they didn't change birdies.

so is not that he has lack of skills, is that his opponent gain a advantage by the change of birdies, is like he has a gun, and he's skilled using one, and his opponent has one gun, but just been handed another gun, overall he would lose.

saying if his opponent learn how to hit back to back court with feather birdies, meaning from what he said , he would lose from lack of skill, and cannot blame equipments

can't understand much of what u r trying to say.

on the part of having a gun advantage. US has the biggest gun and yet they still can't catch O. bin laden nor crushing the tribesman taliban.