i think it's all depend on the movement of the player too. lethal 70 is a stiff and head heavy racket, it's most likely for single player. for double, lethal 90 is better because it's lighter on the head than lethal 70 but for smashing, lethal 70 is still the most powerful one.
One reviewer said that the Lethal 90 is very much like the Tantrum 300 - if he had to pick, he'd give the Tantrum 300 the edge. I'd be interested to know what you think.
How can one say that. May the reviewer adjusted 'other' factors to compensate the basic structural differences.
It was from his personal experience. Anyway, it discouraged me from buying a Lethal 90 - don't see the point if it plays similarly to the Tantrum 300.
I have used the Lethal 90 for a few hours of play since receieving it. It is a fast racket. Incredible speed for defence and net play. Extremely stable face. I find you can place the shots exactly where you want to put them. Great power. I can't compare it to a Lethal 70, but I am more than happy with the power I can generate. I need to get a little more comfortable with this racket as my clears are tending to over travel a few inches right now while I get a feel for it. Will get more play with it this week and offer more feedback. Very impressed so far.
Thanks for the review Yamaho1. Interestingly, the bolded parts above are exactly how I feel about the Tantrum 300. That's very interesting. If I understand correctly what you're saying, you are over-hitting your clears. This sort of makes other people's reviews on rackets sound silly when they say things like "clears are effortless". In my opinion, generally speaking, clears should always be effortless no matter what racket you're using - if they aren't, then your technique must be truly lacking. It's like saying "serving is effortless" with this racket - it just doesn't make any sense to me. Clearing the badminton shuttle (unless you're out of position) to the back line should always be "effortless".
Technique will always trump Equipment. I knew a guy who used to play with a bent deformed wilson steel racket and still clear to the back line. He didn't bother buying a new racket cuz he was piss poor broke. I think when people are saying "clears are effortless" they are just stating their opinion. That with the same stroke...they can get better clears. Equipment/Technology are there to give an edge if possible. Otherwise...why don't we see wooden rackets anymore if different types of rackets make no difference?
You are correct, Just slight over hit. I had 2 hours of doubles play with the racket the first day, and good power in my smash, great placement for the bird, but my clears - not all, but enough if they were left would travel long. I was sure I hadn't changed my stroke, and everything else was so much better. Net play, defence. The Lethal 90 seems to be the racket I have been looking for. The only thing I can figure right now is the racket is fast, and combined with the stability of the face is allowing more of the power to transfer to the clear. Not a big deal, just need a little more play to naturally adjust myself to it, and I'll be hitting the back line again.
Or perhaps it could be that the racket they use doesn't happen to compromise performance (eg. clearing) despite their poor technique. This doesn't necessarily mean the racket gives better performance - it could simply mean it "hides" the players' defects more, by accident. I agree there have been significant improvements in technology since the 1970s, 1980s, and even 1990s. However, I'm not convinced about the apparent (incremental) advancements in rackets released within the last 5-10 years. I do agree that rackets have changed specs. There's a big difference between a change of specs and actual technological advancements that truly improve performance.
Gosh, you're really tempting me to buy the Lethal 90! From memory, one reviewer also said that it's a much more aerodynamic racket than the Tantrum 300. Also, it has some sort of "internal muscle power frame" which makes it even more stable. Personally, it sounds more like clever marketing, but the Lethal 90 seems to be getting consistently good reviews. I think I'll resist the temptation for now though hehe.
If I didn't already have the Tantrum 300 (or if it didn't exist), I would probably get the Lethal 90 without much hesitation.
I think feel will not be as solid as Tantrum. why not the slayer 99 - the more solid version of lethal 90?
What makes you say the Slayer 99 is a more solid version of the Lethal 90? If I were to get the Slayer 99, I'd struggle to decide whether to get the 2U or 3U version. Also, the Slayer series don't get as much positive feedback as the Tantrum or Lethal series.
i think you are wrong this times because slayer 99 is the new racket released recently so not so many people have tried this racket. i have sold one slayer 99 racket to my friend and it seems that his skill and performance has increased because of the racket. this racket is really powerful. i think there will be some good responses from other players.
