Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Techniques / Training' started by xkenji, Jan 10, 2007.
Ha! I see a great business opportunity
All you need is standard set of rackets- with incremental increases in stifness whilst keeping other factors constant, and then sets for other attributes. Could you imagine how much yonex would charge for that!!!!
If only racket manufactures could adhere to standard units of measure for balance, stifness/flex, weight etc. Finding an optimum racket would be so much easier.
i think it will quite impossible to have a standard unit of measure as every maker to make their product more unique as compared to others
after..it is a commercial product...n not something set for world bodies or govtmental....or etc..
Only problem is only hard core badminton fanatics or pros would pay for the consulting fees, which I imagine would be the cost of several rackets as you'll need high speed video recording and analysis.
There are way too many factors and variabilites in badminton. First there's string and string tension, then there's shaft flex and bend profile, then head mass and the position of it which affects swing wt differently, then there's total wt. You can imagine how many rackets you need!
Atm, having no standards is much better for the incumbent manuf. because it makes comparisons based on specifications much more difficult, so that it by and large prevents the consumer from conducting a reverse auction (buyer goes shopping, lowest offer wins). On the other hand, the company that sponsored the study about flex is a racket manufacturer, so if you have the most flexible and most stiff racket of that company, you probably have the rackets that produced the 2-8cm deformation range.
Agreed. But said manu.racket could be sent to X for processing where for example stifness/balance weight could be recorded for comparison across other makes.
as for making standards-It would probably not be possible (if even demeed feasable) financialy for any other company than yonex to do.
Just giving the ideal situation...however saying 'way to many' and then listing them...nice! and means it's possible
It won't happen so i won't add much further. but probably each of these things would be individually accounted for and there is no need for hundreds of minutely differing standards right.-as we wouldn't notice the difference.
for example, bend profile will depend mainly on the shaft length, it's fine tuning... and probably more an issue with flexible rackets.
Unfortunately fuhaifeng uses the most flexible shat n9 now..haha..though hes using n9ii now it s also mid flex i hope..
I wouldn't always believe what you see. He may be using a racquet that is painted in the same colours as a N9/N9ii but it doesn't necessarily mean it is a N9/N9ii under there!
Like with a lot of pros, many use different spec versions of the commercial ones or might even be a completely different racquet altogether.
May be thats right..in some cases..but u can see the bending of the racket clearly due 2 flex..when fuha..playing..
A photo of the shaft bending is hardly a good indication of how flexible it is. I suspect someone like FHF can pretty much bend racquets of any stiffness!
JJS smashing with an MX80 (commercial or KRP). Even if it's a repaint, I doubt it's a wet noodle and and he let the shaft wobble like jelly. I agree 100% with @R20190
Well..may he has that much power..
can someone of you just clarify please:
Which kind of racket generates more power by not using so much swing speed and effort. I mean especially as beginner to get a good length for clear?
A head heavy stiff racket or a head heavy flexible racket or something else?
The highest power potential are on head heavy stiff racket, but keep in mind that it can only be achieved when you are strong enough to bend the stiff shaft.
But for beginner with weak swing, flex racket would provide you easier power boost.
In simple math (not actual calc but just for easy explaination)
10-20 player power : +30 power
20-30 player power : +50 power
30-40 player power : +60 power (the boost are getting smaller as there is limit to what flex shaft can give)
40-50 player power : +65 power
Stiff racket :
10-40 player power : +0 power
40-60 player power : +10 power
60-80 player power : +30 power
80-100 player power : +80 power (the gap getting bigger as stiff shaft had higher potential power but require great strength before you can unlock its potential)
IMO a 4u racket, head heavy but not too much, flexible or mid-flex with a speed head frame box (sword).
Thanks. So this description fits for the Voltric 7 as well. I can string it with a BG 65 for example and 10 kg. With this combination I get better results as beginner as with a 3U, stiff, head heavy racket?
What do you think?
I never tried the Voltric 7, but the specs and the reviews seems ok. If you could get one it may be good. The new one Voltric 7 dg is stiffer and heavier and not as good as the Voltric 7 for a beginner. BG 65 or BG65ti are ok 10kg or 10,5 kg .
Mention of "but more seriously it causes arm injuries if they persist." <-- I have heard of this before, but why is that?