Answers to questions: 1) The question should go back to you - have you seen any local level / national level coaches / players giving it a try ? For me, not seen it as the main grip used throughout. Only specific situations. 2) Again, only specific game situations appropriate to choice of shot chosen. 3) No comment I would say your ability to beat somebody in a game is only partially dependent on the technique. Experience and tactical acumen counts for a lot. What is your experience of playing national level players?
quick answer - I played at 1 level below National (state level) in India when I was young (25 years back). did not follow further as acedemics were more important Now so much more discussion happened after op post . .so let us focus current points in discussion Now so much discussion happen .. so feel free to comment on "Natural Movement of body .. Maximum energy Transfer principal .. Panhandle as natural grip body alignment" post #73. (based on KE & momentum) also please free to comment on post #75 .. Why basic grip PRO ELITE player require more CONTROL by 30/32/34 string tension breaking manufacturing limits where as MORE Power is winning formula by lowering or keep string tension in limit and utilizing reasonable trampolin effect SZ
actual physicist here finally someone who got it correct. the absolute limit to the shuttle's speed is twice the racket head speed at the moment of contact (neglecting the shuttle's initial speed, which is an order of magnitude lower than the racket head speed for overhead shots) in practice the ratio is not 2 but probably around 1.6 I guess, due to various things that I can describe in detail if anyone wants. anyway, using "superlite" rackets does not increase the maximum possible shuttle speed. why? 1. the most important factor to shuttle speed is the racket head speed at contact (which of course depends on power and technique). other factors like string tension just change the ratio of ~1.6 slightly. 2. below a certain point, using lighter rackets does not really increase your maximum swing speed because your hand simply cannot rotate faster. 3. normal weight rackets are already below this point. as far as shuttle speed is concerned, the potential benefit to lighter rackets is for overhead shots with less swing than a full smash (i.e. half smash, some clears). for these, the constraint is how fast you can accelerate and light rackets have an obvious advantage for that. this isn't taking into account how control and consistency changes for lighter rackets, but those are more subjective.
^^ Very interesting... learn something new everyday! http://curricula2.mit.edu/pivot/book/ph1102.html?acode=0x0200 So the max speed of the shuttle is 2x racket head speed, and in reality less due to loss of energy and momentum in the collision. So if someone who has not yet reached his physical max racket head speed and acceleration with a certain racket, by switching to a lighter racket in both total wt and swing wt, he can swing faster to get a 1.6x faster shuttle speed. Time for me to try out the Arc FB to see if I'm near my max speed limit yet...
How embarrassing for you that you missed the post underneath what you quote, which proves that that particular maths makes assumptions which are not true for badminton. Ho hum.
Yes finally a physicist. So you say you can get about 80Mph 0f 50Mph swing. That's seems too high, more details would be great. Can you also inform me what mass would be used when trying to figure out formula's regarding badminton. What Mass is taken into consideration with a say horizontal(overhead) swing forward like a drive.(hope you understand that)
Gosh, things are out of hand, aren't they? 1) the racket swing in badminton is not linear - there is little point in trying to use linear mechanics to describe it. Ever heard of the computer phrase "garbage in, garbage out"? Well that's is what is happening here by trying to describe a non-linear problem with (only) linear mechanics. You want to know what masses are involved? Sure - racket with strings: 80 ~ 100g, shuttle: 5g. Sorry, no-one is interested in the rotational dynamics so there seems no need to mention a racket's moment of inertia (the rotational equivalent of mass). Why do Yonex use KE instead of P? That's just an awful question. You can't use one without the other! Seriously, they are both inherent physical properties of a system. One is not superior to the other.
forgot to reply to this... because there is not 'more power' available - they already get maximum power, but you can get maximum power AND more control with higher tensions.
Yip out of hand, and sorry for the awful questions. Just trying to get a grip on it. Plugged the figures into the other equation you gave btw and got 98mph which is even closer
TIME Advantage in Panhandle Style Here is the Post about TIME (Gain) in Panhandle grip and it’s impact in game for more aggressive style play. We all know how time is important in life (have we not heard so many times including by ourself .. damn only if I have more time to do this Observation #1 : personal experience as well as others comments .. those who oppose Panhandle grip but commented on other Panhandle grip players “Ability to take shuttle early” style. This is consistent with “natural body alignment (post #73) ’ and hence quicker reaction time correlation. Observation #2 : The contact height in panhandle grip is less than basic grip. Background : let’s just revisit basic concept which is badminton court dimension 44 * 20 feet (22 feet across each player side BUT with one specific HURDLE to cross for each player to consider .. which is Net Height ( 61 inches side to 60 inches middle ). It means from whichever position you are in the your side of the court (where 2 inch away from net or 21 feet away from net while hitting shuttle in any position) you have to Cross 60inch height to let it go other side. This creates and IMPACTS the angle based on position on the court. Bringing essentially modified Trigonometric equations into picture with problem and resultant output angle one could have. If your contact height at say 21 feet from net is 11 feet high (say 6 feet tall player + 3 feet hand height + 2 feet height racket sweet-spot contact area and smash is been played still to clear 5 feet height net .. the possible angles are limited and penetration area has limitation you can’t go steep after a point) ** Think of line starting at 11 feet height from 21 feet away from net just “kissing 5 feet height at net” and going in opponent court’s at what intersection point. Naturally close to net with the same height .. the angles / intersection points become steeper .. think about net kill and difficulty to defend it Similarly when opponent hit the shot you as a player has the same consideration while return option calculations. TIME : even if you get “fraction of second” quicker for return which panhandle grip allow you to do .. say for example 0.05 second (1/20 second faster than basic grip) on conservative side as TIME GAIN Even if contact height is LOW in this grip (so all keep saying) .. it’s what 1-2 inch difference in lower height BUT You take shuttle N – 0.05 second timeframe EARLIER ( as compare to N second reference point ) typically N could be 0.2 to 0.5 second in fast placed rally .. So even considering you take shuttle 2 inches lower in panhandle grip but 0.05 second earlier … The Height Gain for return stroke impact is PLUS ( as you intercepted smash on you at higher height than normally could have at 0.05 second later or you intercepted lift like return from your opponent in upward flight Earlier by 0.05 second with better steeper angle on your opponent. * The close to net you do this more dangerous you become in this advantage situation * Use as threat: So this TIME Gain become advantage for you as ability to have better steep angle or threat of executing it to spread your opponent more or use that extra time for hold & deception or force your opponent to react to play “return of his return back to him 0.05 second earlier” causing him ‘time mismatch’ of his game tempo. (just when he started to get feel of it and trying to match it by quick reaction time .. delay and hold shuttle every once to confuse further) . TIME GAIN Summary: On a first look despite the conventional wisdom of low contact point (by 2 inchs ?) the time gain of 0.05 second gives much more ADVANTAGE in the game while playing panhandle style. SZ
^^ I really can't imagine how you can "intercept a smash" or "delay and hold a shuttle" as you say with a panhandle grip... wth, is that even possible with a normal human anatomy?
Probably meaningless - as I've been trying to explain, the equation is not applicable to a badminton swing anyway.* *edit: the equation on its own is not a reasonable description
you need to think in a different way! Don't be a sheep and just copy the others! don't forget to consider natural intuition experience of the theory
Hello all, Personally think this has all gone a little bit crazy. Hence why I am adding to the madness Shuttle speed calculations: For those thinking about shuttle speeds post contact... I can't help you calculate, but I wanted to ask: if the shuttle speed is 100mph just after contact, some say that is "too high" or whatever. Why do you think this is too high? Lets say FHF smashes his fastest. His racket is obviously going a lot faster than yours. His shuttle speed is measured as 206mph. But this is the average speed of the shuttle in the first 3 feet or so - it is NOT the speed the shuttle came off the strings. When the shuttle arrives at its destination, it will be considerably below this speed (thinking 50s - 60s? Not sure. Anybody know?). I believe the speed off the strings must be extremely high, just to allow for how much a shuttle will slow down in the first few feet. We all know that shuttles slow down in strange ways (start faster and slow down rapidly). Any thoughts anybody? To superzoom. You have asked a few good questions, and made some statements that I believe are not well thought out, and I will do my best to explain my reasoning.. Please bear with me Firstly, some things everyone seems to accept as true (please correct me if I am wrong): 1. Panhandle grip must have a lower contact than a regular grip. How much lower is debatable. 2. A regular grip can produce far more power than a panhandle grip, if using correct technique (using pronation). 3. Panhandle will allow you to take some shots earlier than a regular grip (not ALL shots simply because of point 1!), and hence some shots will be taken earlier by a regular grip. 4. Most beginners prefer to play with a panhandle grip, as they find it easier to get more control. 5. There is no advantage in terms of control no matter what grip you use - the more you practice the more control you will get of whatever grip you are using. Tension (control vs power): Earlier, you asked why professionals would want "MORE CONTROL" if they could have "more power". Amleto stated that they have basically got all the power they can get, and are only increasing the control. I believe that a professional might get a bit more power if they altered their tension, but the point is that they get plenty of power through good technique (technique is grip + swing mechanics). So, now that they have a hell of a lot of power (enough to be DANGEROUS), they look for the perfect complement of power, which is control, which they can gain through changing to a higher tension. So now they have power + control, so they are winners. If you take away power (which I personally believe would be the outcome of changing to panhandle for overhead shots), you are left with a player with excellent control (the same as BEFORE they changed grips - no benefit) but no ability to kill the shuttle. Contact height: You stated that the difference in height is 1-2 inches. I believe this is a very important part of your argument? I believe this is wrong. The important thing is being able to reach HIGHER and hit DOWNWARDS steeper. Reaching higher for the sake of it is not important, what is important is the downward angles, with reasonable power. In order to have some power (do not care about technique, I care about avoiding injury), I believe a neutral wrist (not flexed or whatever and hence not strained) is important. The "neutral" wrist position for a regular grip is high above the head. This is a good contact point - the body is not strained. The contact point can go slightly further in front (lowering slightly) to hit downwards. A panhandle grip gives a neutral contact point that is out in front of the body (like looking into a handheld mirror at full arms length) and can be held quite comfortably a little high than this too. I believe that the difference in height, such that you can hit a good downwards angle, is MORE THAN A FOOT. Not 2 inches. I think this is very important. I do not believe the disadvantage of height is as little as you say. However, if you start contorting your wrist into unusual positions, a guess anything is possible, but at a dramatic loss of efficiency and power. Taking it early calculation: Your final point is that taking the shuttle early is better than taking it higher. Well, by definition, a player that can reach higher will take high shots earlier than you can. So please portray this disadvantage in your calculations as well. Furthermore, as the net height is so high in badminton, I believe most shots have to be hit somewhat upwards, potentially rewarding players for being able to take a shuttle earlier when it is high above them? What do you think? The big points: The main argument FOR panhandle: Now then, the PRINCIPLE argument, as I understand it, from yourself is... 1. Game is becoming flatter (people do not want to lift the shuttle to those with awesome power who can hit steep angles). 2. It may be possible to play shots quicker with a panhandle grip (your post #91 talks about taking the shuttle earlier being a good thing). 3. We should play more shots with a panhandle grip. My main argument AGAINST panhandle: Now, assuming the above argument, let us say that a player chooses to change to a panhandle grip for these shots. Lets say EVERYONE changes. Will they game remain fast and flat? My opinion is NO. The reason I think this is because you have removed the power from EVERYONES game. So now, there is zero threat from lifting the shuttle high and deep to the back line. Your opponent, with their panhandle grips, will not be able to hit as steeply, and certainly with nowhere near as much power. So the game will resort into a series of high clears because nobody can kill the shuttle, and nobody can risk trying to kill the shuttle. Anyone who tries to hit it hard, will be punished for having a weak attack, so nobody attacks... Then someone will think... hmmm... what if I change grips, and begin to hit the shuttle really really hard (the new Fu Haifeng), and nobody will be able to BEAT ME. Why? Because all I have to do is lift HIGH to them, and wait for them to clear it to me (or hit a crap smash which I can kill anyway) and then I can hit it steeply down at them, and I would be on the attack, and they still couldn't beat me, because they are lifting the shuttle to me and I CAN kill it. If you changed grips, there would be NO flat game, because it is too easy to win with lifts, and the winners would be those who improved their attack! Which is where we are now! So, what do players do now? They play fast and flat, and hit hard overhead. There is no desire to play faster and flatter at the expense of power overhead, because the game would immediately stop being fast and flat (as explained above) because there is no threat from big smashes! If this isn't compelling evidence against your reasoning behind panhandle grips, i do not know what is :s Any thoughts welcome sorry for the essay
Only because we were using 50mph racket speed as the example. If you were to use a faster swing then 100mph shuttle speed is fine. For example if you where to swing at 150mph by my calculations the shuttle speed could be about 450mph jk
What I mean to say is that if 50mph swing speed gave 100mph shuttle speed (I know it doesn't), how do we still know that is too fast? Without considering what that would turn into over the next few feet, how can we judge if it is correct? It may be for example, that a 50mph swing speed creates a 70mph average speed over 3 feet, which is suitably pathetic compared to a professional, but the "calculation" was 100mph which is "too high"? I just don't get why we are even thinking about the initial speed after contact, rather than considering the average speed over the first 3 feet, which would allow us to "compare" to professionals.
Re measuring smash speeds, commonly it's done with radar guns just like in tennis. This is easily accessible and done cost effectively, especially in tournaments. But the problem in badminton is that the shuttle decelerates rapidly immediately after collision (due to air drag on the skirt) , so this method's measurements will yield numbers that will be inevitably less than using high speed video under controlled conditions to analyze frame by frame to calculate instantaneous speed off the racket in the first few inches after collision. Eg. Yonex video of TBH 421km/h smash. And video of FHF smash compared to a beginner/intermediate player.
