Just thinking out load really but interested in others opinions.. So each time a new racket or range is released im tempted to buy one like many others and read all the new blurb about new material, steeper angles etc but when was the last actual jump in racket material or technology that actually did leave people who didnt upgrade behind? A big enough gulf in the rackets that a player with less ability with a newer racket would even slightly bridge the gap between him/herself and a better player using a lesser racket? All this astrox chat got me thinking as i was about to buy an arcsaber 11 before getting caught up in the 88s vs arcsaber 11 debate and is it worth paying more for the astrox..? Or is it even worth buying an arcsaber 11 over a cheaper used arcsaber 10 and so on?....
Just my 2 cents, but I don't think the racket technologies have improved so drastically in the last 4-5 years. I can't comment on any longer timeframe since that is how long I have been playing. Do I love the whippy feeling that Namd gives over traditional graphite? I absolutely do. Do I think that Astrox 99, made mostly with Namd, improves my play compared to my "nanometric graphite" Duora Z Strike? No. They are different rackets, with different balance points, head heaviness, flexibility...etc I enjoy playing with both, but guess what I think will maybe improve my performance? Perhaps a head lighter racket than the ones I own XD
Im with you that nothing has changed in the last 4 or 5 years for sure, but im also thinking what has actually changed in the last 10 or 15 even? I mean arcsaber 10 was out in like 2008 or around then? Most say that arcsaber 11 is the same racket but its still available new now for over £100 gbp! I guess im trying in my own mind to sell the idea that the new namd material and rotational technology is a worth while leap from previous rackets to justify the cost but really, i suppose at a social/club level atleast it really isnt!
Quite surprise that Ax99 and DZS is about the same for you. Agreed. Most high end racket provide good performance in one way or another. But in the end, it really come down to individual performance and prefer racket. I own a DZS and N9ii, Both had their own Pro and Con.
He never said those rackets are the same... He just thinks, and I completely agree with him, that there is no big technology leap, there is no better racket between the two. I think the last real technology improvement is the use of 100% carbon. Since that, improvements have been minor
Yup the last biggest change is the isometric head? Then is the play of material so manufacturer can better play with weight distributions but for the recreational player no big diff. Box and aero frame also the other major change years back. Maybe the next biggest change will be a full carbon handle? Is now wood. Sent from my SM-N950F using Tapatalk
Isometric Head and the type of frame (box / aero) are minor improvements IMO. I'm not saying that they don't make a difference, but I think the OP was talking about great technology leaps that players must absolutely use, otherwise they would be at a great disadvantage. Carbon handle doesn't make a lot of difference. Some manufacturers already use this to reduce the weight (Wilson for example).
Yes i was more talking about leaps that would leave users of older rackets behind.. i understand fully why yonex etc need to churn out rackets to sell and ofcourse r&d will at some point lead to the next big step up but curious as to when we think that may be or indeed what!? Theres only so many repaints and slight changes to frame shape and design that can happen so i guess in the short term we have to make do with some new cool names to encourage us to buy the new stuff ha
I might regret saying this in 20 years time, but I'm not so sure there is room for a 'next big step'. What serious deficiencies are present in rackets today? It's already possible to make rackets lighter than most people prefer to play with. The flexibility range seems saturated i.e. there are some seriously super stiff and super flexible rackets. I'm sure improvements are possible, but I don't think there's any space left for a big next step. If you could have your ideal racket, what would that play like? And how would it be different from your current favourite racket?
Power of a voltric, speed and feel of a js10 while looking like any high end li ning would do me just fine! Ha.. You make some great points though, playable weight at either end has been passed.. stiffness also, though something as forgiving as a flexible racket with the control of a stiffer one would be an achievement but yonex are claiming this with astrox arent they? I honestly do think that with current materials rackets have peaked and were just looking at new paint and names for the time being..
in more advance level like state level player and above I think it will make different.. but amateur/club level, I don't think so.. it might improve slightly but not so much significant can be seen..
