Do you prefer isometric or oval head rackets?

Discussion in 'Racket Recommendation / Comparison' started by ttktom, Sep 29, 2003.

?

do you prefer Isometric or Oval?

  1. Isometric

    9 vote(s)
    81.8%
  2. Oval

    2 vote(s)
    18.2%
  1. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    25
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Just imagine a technically correct iso will have a square shape. How do you think it will play? Also the head dimensions, especially at the width sides at the top, will have an impact on the racquet's center of gravity. A racquet with extended shoulders has a different center of gravity than the classic oval, AOTBE. You can also simulate this by adding lead tape to the shoulders and have a few swing.
     
  2. cooler

    cooler Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    21,811
    Likes Received:
    23
    Occupation:
    Surfing, reading fan mails:D, Dilithium Crystal hu
    Location:
    Basement Boiler Room
    ....................................
     
    #342 cooler, Aug 17, 2008
    Last edited: Aug 17, 2008
  3. phandrew

    phandrew Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2007
    Messages:
    2,131
    Likes Received:
    3
    Occupation:
    Racquet breaker
    Location:
    Melbourne, Australia
    If yonex didn't design the isometric frame then who did?
     
  4. Marlboro

    Marlboro Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2006
    Messages:
    216
    Likes Received:
    14
    Location:
    Clementi
    in the 80s when i was playing badminton in my back yard i was using a carlton steel frame racket and its not oval in shape...more like isometric frame... and i don't think yonex racket was the 1st isometric racket.
     
  5. cooler

    cooler Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    21,811
    Likes Received:
    23
    Occupation:
    Surfing, reading fan mails:D, Dilithium Crystal hu
    Location:
    Basement Boiler Room
    yes, there was a photo in BF posted long time ago but i can't find it. However, that racket maker did not patent it or trademark it.
     
  6. Nano_josh

    Nano_josh Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2008
    Messages:
    20
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    UK

    Or even gd ol' wooden rackets :p
     
  7. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    25
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    I don't believe you can patent a racquet head shape or the names oval, isometric, or any funny names. Oval and isometric are English words like square and circle and Yonex would not want to "steal" common words and patent them. Just imagine someone taking out a patent for air and water. You know how much money can be made from these two very basic necessities? Reminds me about an American company patenting the word "BASMATI" for their Texas rice, which tastes more like low quality rice you have to pay somebody to eat it.
     
  8. silentheart

    silentheart Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    3,327
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    USA
    ROX design and manufacture the first ISO racquet. I actually had one in very early 80. However, it fail because of durability issue. If I remember right, the manufacture closed since late 80.
     
  9. silentheart

    silentheart Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    3,327
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    USA
    You may not pattern the word "ISO" or "ISOMETRIC", However, you can pattern the design of it. You can also trade mark "ISOMETRIC" in a specific product. Just like Microsoft trade mark "Window" in operating system.
    I thought someone claim he worked in international trade business before?
     
    #349 silentheart, Aug 18, 2008
    Last edited: Aug 18, 2008
  10. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    25
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    You cannot patent common words. A patent grants a property right to the inventor that will prevent anyone else from making, using, or selling an invention.
    You are confusing patents with trademarks. A trademark-and there are trademarks and registered trademarks-is used to protect a word, a symbol, a device, or a name that is used for the purpose of trading goods. The word "Window" is not a Microsoft trademark. However the words "Windows Vista" is a Microsoft trademark. Pls note "Windows Vista" is not a common word, just a trade name to trade goods/services.
    If what you are claiming that "Window" is a Microsoft trademark is true, then Microsoft would be able to earn even more money from suing trademark violations of its trademark than from its Windows Operating System. You would make a very good patent and trademark legal counsel for Microsoft.;)
     
  11. cooler

    cooler Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 25, 2002
    Messages:
    21,811
    Likes Received:
    23
    Occupation:
    Surfing, reading fan mails:D, Dilithium Crystal hu
    Location:
    Basement Boiler Room
    what are u trying to say?? Didn't i said 'racket maker did not patent it** or trademark it'???? aren't u rephrasing what i've said ??? Yes, SH is right, one can trademark a logo or certain word/words or a slogan.

    yonex still can patent an isometric design if they really really want to but it would serve little or no useful purpose because money reward is not there. I will not elaborate the whys now.
     
    #351 cooler, Aug 18, 2008
    Last edited: Aug 18, 2008
  12. silentheart

    silentheart Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    3,327
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    USA
    1) Yonex never pattened Isometric Frame design of badminton frame because Yonex was not the first company came up with that design. Nor any one here claim Yonex holds patten to ISO frame design. It is you, Mr. Taneepak, who try to confuse the issue and putting words in other people's mouth.
    2) Oh, yes, MS did trademark "Window" for operating system. Just like Apple Computer trademark the name "Apple" and "Ipod" for a device. If you wish, do a search on Google on Window trade mark case, I thought you are pretty good at just search internet and post whatever you find on it.
    3) Once again, please do not invent facts. Facts are verifiable. Your statement is not.
     
  13. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    25
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Look, I said earlier that you cannot patent common words like oval, window, etc., because a patent is filed for an invention. Nowhere did I bring up the word trademark then, until you slid it in later in an effort to confuse it with patent by bringing in Microsoft's Window Operating system. Pls go back to the previous posts and ascertain the first author of the word "trademark"-Silentheart.
    BTW, the word window is not a trademark. If it is how come I can use it here? Also how can window suppiers continue to sell windows and advertising their windows for sale without a blast from Microsoft?
    It is patent and let us stick to patent. You cannot patent the word "isometric" or "oval" even if you were the first to come up with the designs. Inventions, not words, are patentable.
     
  14. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    25
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Silentheart, do you know what you are talking about? How in the world can you trademark common words like window, let alone patent it? Why don't you check with your company's lawyers, before you become a laughing stock of patent and trademark lawyers.
     
  15. silentheart

    silentheart Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    3,327
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    USA
    Your honor, I rest my case.
    http://www.microsoft.com/about/legal/trademarks/usage/windows.mspx

    By the way, did you check you claim against Cab30ms vs MP99?
    I never claim Yonex patten the word "Isometric". Nor I claim it trademarked the word. I only say Yonex did not pattern the design of ISO frame because some other company did it before Yonex. Also, I did not claim Yonex trademark "Isomatric". Same as I said MS trademarked "Windows" for operating system. Nothing more.

    PS, Is my English really that bad that you can not understand what I try to explain to you?
     
  16. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    25
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    Silentheart, you don't get it, do you? Maybe you cannot see the forest for the trees. I have said that you cannot patent or trademark common words. The words apple and window are common words to mean the windows you find in your house and the word apple is a fruit you can eat. That is why "Apple" and "Windows" can still be used by anyone in their common words and meanings because common words cannot be patented or trademarked. Apple and Windows have to be very specific that they are not selling windows or apples (common words with common meanings) and must beyond all doubts specify/imply to the user that these words are related to computers and their operating software and have nothing connected with these common words.
    BTW, Microsoft's trademark on "Windows" was actually turned down as being too generic when it first applied. Its second application a few years later was approved, some say under circumstances that may be challenged.
     
  17. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    25
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    What is the basis of checking a Cab30MS and an MP99? When we compare two items we must have one common basis or the same parameter. To compare an oval of one model with an iso of another model with any meaningful results, we must use a common parameter.
    For example, let us use the parameters of a racquet head dimensions as specified in the BWF laws. The laws say that the racquet stringed area shall not exceed a certain overall length and a certain overall width. Therefore, for a fair comparison between an oval and an iso, both the overall length and overall width of the racquets to be compared must be the same. Otherwise it is like comparing a kid's racquet with one that is used by an adult. Let us say Cab ABC oval has a stringed area with an overall length of 240mm and an overall width of 187mm, we must therefore use an iso, say Isometric ABC with the same overall length of 240mm and overall width of 188mm. This is comparing the two on a common parameter. Needless to say, the Isometric ABC will have a much larger stringed area. How can it be the other way around?
     
  18. silentheart

    silentheart Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2004
    Messages:
    3,327
    Likes Received:
    34
    Location:
    USA
    I am trying to bring your back in your arguments where everything started.
    1) You made an over general statement that ISO frames have bigger string bed than Oval thus bigger sweetspot in post #255, #257 and #313. You even made same claim and restrict it to modern, not Jr. racquet. I am giving you example here and asking you to correct your statement again.
    2) You keep claim that Oval frames are more stream line than ISO. I am asking you to restrict down the conditions in post #312. Now you are finally agree that what I asked you to do?
    3) I am asking you to check it out so I don't have to take pictures. I think you can verify it yourself. I can post all the picture I want, buy a verification by yourself is the best proof.
    4) I am trying very hard to explain to you that given every factors are the same between ISO and Oval frame except the head shape, there is no difference in air resistance between Oval and ISO frame.
    5) You keep claiming the ISO is just a Oval with extended shoulder. Therefor ISO has bigger string bed. I am telling you that is not always the case. You ask to restrickt down to 1 factor, ISO vs Oval shape. That means same string bad area also. Which you are not following your own rule.

    I am asking you to stop inventing your own logic to justify your statement.
     
  19. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    25
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    I don't think we are on the same level. I stand by on what I have posted. You disagree obviously, so be it. Yes, I am saying again that AOTBE, an oval has a smaller stringbed or area than an iso; that an iso has more power but is more ponderous than an oval. BTW, I use these principles to advise OEMs and racquet manufacturers, the former were grateful although the latter obviously were not entirely greenhorns.
     
  20. taneepak

    taneepak Regular Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    6,526
    Likes Received:
    25
    Occupation:
    Designing and producing quality feather shuttlecoc
    Location:
    Hong Kong
    BTW, Yonex Japan has confirmed that the racquet head of Yonex Cab series are smaller than Yonex Armortec series and they (cab series) also have a smaller stringed area. The reason given by Yonex was because the Armortec series use an isometric square head shape.
    You may wish to check this out with Yonex Japan yourself.
     

Share This Page