Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Asian Games 2010 - Badminton' started by twobeer, Nov 21, 2010.
bro , u look carefully , on the yonex racket , itself it put racket tension 23-25.
You can peel that sticker right off and string 4lbs higher
So? All that means is that is what the manufacturer suggests and it preserves a meaningless warranty (see Taneepak's post on that topic). Those suggested tensions have no basis in physical reality. Oh by the way, you know who strings my racquets at those high tensions? The guys at the YONEX STORE where I buy them.
How can u do that , its cheating , the real fact of Yonex racket tension is 23-25. My former Yonex Armotec 700 string 27 , with BG 66 , with one heavy smash , the whole flame crack. From then on , i switch to Pro ace and then to Li ning racket now.
Careful he is in Sinapore. The correct advice is you can peel that sticker right off and place it in the nearest waste basket and string 4lbs higher. Don't want to get the poor guy caned do you?
O I didn't see his location.
Well then there is more to the story than what you are saying because the only time I've had a frame crack is from collsions. If your reasoning were correct, we would have been watching Lin Dan change his Armotec 700 every rally a few years back or the same with LCW today or Peter Gade and so on. Either the racquet had suffered previous duress (collision of some sort), your stringer is incompetent or hates you, or there really was a legitimate defect in which case, Yonex would have honored the warranty.
Cheating? lol that's cute.
The advised tension is for warranty only, no one takes it seriously. Even I string my rackets higher than that, and so far, nothing has cracked. Of course, the only YY rackets I own are the Ti-10 and the Z-Slash (which is a crappy racket imop)...
I see somebody here mention the price of the product, and NS9900 being $350? All I can say is if you're spending $350 on a NS9900 in Canada you're getting ripped off... And yes, high end rackets are expensive but than there will always be people that buy them because they're curious about it... I myself have not bought a yonex since the ARC Z because I didn't like the racket and there are other brands out there as an option... I have almost all the N series from LN, a couple of Victors, Forza's, Wilson's and Panda Powers because I like collecting rackets and I just want to try out different rackets...
Obviousily there are differences between brands and their racket and what they pack into their racket and marketing etc involved... But right now, it does seem like Yonex is losing their battle... On the players front, yes they have LCW and the MAS team, TH and Gade but other the LCW and sometimes KKK and TBH, could you really say they have a very good chance of winning a major title vs the chinese or the koreans? While there are obviousily money involved with sponsorship and backroom politics, I don't think a nation will risk performing poorly just so they can get sponsorship from a company, it just doesn't make sense... Success is an extremely important factor in marketing let's not forget that, that's why Nike pays Kobe and Lebron tonnes of money because they're the best in their sport and will sponsor up and comers because they don't want to risk losing that player to another rival... Kevin Durant is a good example of that...
Like I said there is only so much tech you can pack into a racquet. It shouldn't be surprising that other manufacturers are catching up. For the average player the leading edge is really meaningless. Taking myself as an example. I've played with the Armortec 900P for 4 years now. Looking to the next generation of racquet technology to improve my game is a little bit silly. After all, it's pretty hard to argue that it is the limitations of the 900P that are responsible for the holes in my game. If LCW hasn't outgrown it then I certainly haven't.
For the record, the most I've ever paid for a high end Yonex racquet in Vancouver is about 250 $CDN strings included. Here in Taiwan you can buy the latest and greatest Yonex for around (130 - 150) $CDN including strings at the local Yonex store.
Actually I have personally witness many frame collapses form pros durin tournament and training /yes, even seen Gades frame collaps during warmup in Copenhagen Masters etc). There are no statistics of course for this (especially for "free" rackets .. But I can tell you personally I have had 6 NS8000 died during stringing (at 33lbs). I think it is wrong to generalize about quality of a brand (It is mainly model specific imop). Yonex has some rackets that work great with High tension stringing, but they are generally speakin weaker than many of the competitors, and of course as mentioned have pretty low recommendations (and warranties) for tension. I think they do not really focus on durability (when they were having close to monopoly on high-end gear, breakage probably just meant another extra sale ) SO it didn make sense for them to reinforce and use more expensive material and construction on weak spots to increaase rigidness and durability. If you are a stringer You can easlyy compare when striniging the N-series Li-Ning rackets to the Nanospeeds and arcasbers that the rigidness of the frame is far superior on the N-series.
I agree with you that the performance increase of a better racket is not a big issue for most "mortals" .I think many like you buy a racket and is happy with that untill it breaks . The reasoning if it is good enough for LCW it is good enough for me, has a fundamental flaw however. Most player should really adjust the racket as their technique, strenght and control increases. Beginners should start of with light flexy racket and when you getting stronger you should gradually move ot more heavy, stiffer and higher-tension stringing (generally speaking for singles player). So "Best" is not a fixed static I think, but rather individual "best" and trying to MATCH what best maximises the potential of the player where he is at. In most cases I think players are using the WRONG racket.
Technology has really improved mostly in material research, and albeit the differences of course are smaller improving something already good (compared to for example moving from wood to steel to carbon).. the improvements still are there.
I would personally for example feel much more confident strinigng a N55 at 37lbs than I would feel strining an 3U/AT900P at that tension, as i feel the 900P is alot less rigid frame-wise.
I agree. The high-end Yonex rackets didnt suit me at all, and many of their mid-level rackets were too flexy, so I tried others. Li Ning rackets perform very well for me - in the beginning, N90 was the best one for me, now I prefer the N50II (or N50 in some doubles). I realise of course I dont really need a high-end racket, but I didn't want to spend even more time testing around and decided to stick to Li Ning. Now, of course, I own more rackets than really needed, but I like having a few extra, comparing those I have and changing around in training. In the end, that enables me to pick the racket that currently suits me best, which is still the N50II. An important issue is durability though - I've seen many Oliver rackets break, and a few Yonex, but no Victor or Li Ning. Tensions aren't really high in my clubs, I'm probably in the top 15 with 24-26lbs, so I can't say much about the influence of higher tensions, but I dont think normal use without clashes should result in breaking rackets as it did for our top player - he broke 3 Oliver in 1 week (training + 2 day tournament), which is really a sign of low quality for me, even though the racket may suit his needs.
APAC Canada actually brought a LT70 and I tried it. Maybe I need more time to get used to it (a few strokes wouldn't do it lah), LT50 at 25 lbs is perfect for me. I really do not care if clone or what, as long as the racket feels good for me and bring out the best in my game, and CHEAP, that's it for me. So, now I use APAC LT10 (gifft) and APAC LT50 (I wish for one more at same spec) and that is probably the last rackets I buy before I go fishing or play social, recreational badminton with a bunch of ladies (older ladies) and men with pot belly
Oh don't get me wrong. At no point would I advocate using a racquet simply because a PRO uses it. Certainly being a doubles player modelling any aspect of LCW's game would be futile. Actually when I started with the AT 900 I had no idea who LCW was. I never paid attention to the pro circuits. My point in bringing LCW wasn't if the racquet is good enough for him its good enough for me. The point is that if there is an aspect of my game that I feel is lacking, the speed of my smash for example, then it is doubtful that the answer lies in some new technology or the racquet but, rather my technique.
I went to the ATP 900 because it was the racquet that feels best. I was forced to switch when the Muscle Power 100 was discontinued. Now that the ATP 900 is due to be cancelled, I will be faced with finding another go to racquet. This is where Yonex is vulnerable, by discontinuing the Armortec line, they will force me and other players to find a new racquet. The last time they did this to me Yonex was the only game in town. This time around, there are other viable options. To make matters worse for them, the Voltric line is not a viable replacement so far. Sadly for me but, lucky for my wallet LN hasn't impressed me so far.
Which comment did you refer to? Mine? Or twobeer's? In case you meant me, I totally agree with you - if rackets are good enough for Pros to use, I can surely not complain about their performance and blame any weakness on them - if I play with suitable material. If I have a very wristy technique and use a heavy, head-balanced racket or not the speed and timing to flex a stiff shaft but still play with one, it's to be expected my performance is lacking. That's not due to the quality, but the characteristics of the racket - it's not suited to me, and if Lin Dan plays well with a taped N90, that's nice for him, but for me it's a bit too heavy now, if Lee Chong Wei likes the AT900P, good for him, but I don't, so I won't try forcing myself to get used to it and play acceptable, but rather choose a racket that compiments my style and try to improve single aspects.
Just because the rackets above are following the dinosaurs into extinction, if they aren't broken, why need to change lah?...or are you finding excuses to change them lah
From 1988 to today, I bought only one racket, i.e. APAC LT50 for CAD70, and since then the LT50 has been replaced 2X; LT60 and LT70, so what, I don't need to change, the LT50 is still a very good racket...I know I am bad, cos I am not supporting the economy, the manufacturers who sponsor the SS for us to see and the players' wallet who endorse these rackets
Well that's the problem, mine did break and the second hand market for them at the time was terrible, still is as far as I know. Hopefully my Armortecs last till the end of my playing days but I have a lot of years left so if history is any guide, the next time I need to replace a raquet there's a good chance the Armortec 900P won't be available.
Lah? Isn't it supposed to be Eh?
Actually I think racket can be changed if used long time even if they don't break, because the stress from flexing the shaft. An old shaft can loose its original flex due to constant overflexing for powerful smashers etc.
Problem also is if you have say 5-6 rackets and 2 break you may face problem with cyckling the restriningin and having enough spares for competitions, then if the model is discontinued it may be better to start looking at alternatives efen if you have a few ol AT900Ps left. In the AT900P case i dont think there is much a problem yet though with the LVW special editions etc.
I actually think both ARC-10, and ARC-8dx are a tad more powerful than 900P (I think LCW would beneift of switching but I think it is old habits that is stopping him from chaninging rackets). N55, N50-II and SW35 even a bit better.. I doubt LCW will use AT900P in the olympics in London 2012, if he does he will have a material dissadvantage to his peers from China, Korea and Denmark, who will have improved hardware for sure.
I think Yonex will have finished the Voltrics by then, and probably have most of their sponsored players use them instead of ATs. Perhaps they'll even develop a new one for TBH?^^ That guy seems to hang on to the Ti-10 as long as possible....perhaps they can ask Li Ning for a few hints on how to improve that one