Personnal progression asking for advices
- Thread starter SimonCarter
- Start date
Thanks for clarifying! I certainly didn't get that from what you posted previously so thanks for taking the time to explain - too subtle for me to pick up maybe. Perhaps this will clear it up for others too. However, I do not agree with your sentiment regarding precision and string tension. I don't think higher string tensions give more precision. If I understand correctly, what the OP needs is greater touch with this shot (meaning the ability to play it with more control, and have the shuttle behave more closely to what they are trying to achieve). Greater touch comes from practice (as you have advocated) but is not in my experience in any way affected by string tension, other than the obvious in that playing with a different string tension usually decreases your touch and control because its different to what you are used to and takes a little while to adjust. Thus I wouldn't agree about the string tension increasing precision, because in my view precision is a technical problem in that it is the development of the correct motor control to really feel where the shuttle is going when you hit it. As I stated before, the correct technique should be easy for a player to utilise regardless of tension - control of the shuttle is a skill that is affected by tension, but not caused by it.
Regardless, thank you for explaining and I certainly understand a lot better where you are coming from and why you made your recommendation. It looks as though OP has taken your advice on board and may experiment gradually with alternate string tensions to see if there is any difference.
Thanks again for explaining, and good luck to OP!
They dominate because of numbers playing. Absolute numbers of kids playing are high and if there is an injury, then another player takes their place. Their burnout rate is high and earlier than other countries.
So, I find it hard to believe that they are advised to string to high tensions at young ages. I live in HK and next to Guangdong (China) province and the kids here are not given such advice to go to 28lbs or above or change racquets. They concentrate on technique and repetition of correct technique, getting correct movement patterns and being able to reproduce these when running around the court.
Borkya
Regular Member
This is totally true. Young, fit late teen/early 20's players couldn't care less about their equipment. An ex-national team (Chinese) coach once played with a child's racket (the small ones with like 18 pound tension) and he kicked everyone in my clubs ass, haha. Young people would rather practice smashes, footwork and improve their abs because they are young and energetic and broke! So they take when they can get with equipment.
Meanwhile it is the older players that obsess about racket tension and whatever latest gizmo Yonex or Victor has come out with, thinking that technology can improve where the body is lacking. Also, only adults can afford to restring rackets every few weeks and buy brand name stuff!
You know you are good when you can borrow a no name racket from the courts that haven't been re-strung in so long that no one knows what it was originally strung at and STILL win a club game. If you are so concerned about a few pounds making or breaking your game, your head isn't in the right place for the kind of improvements you really need to make.
Also, I concur with Cheung. I live and train in China and see lots of kids. Chinese kids aren't playing with rackets strung at 30 pounds. While they do start playing at age 4 and 5, parents and coaches are WAYYYYY too worried about the kid injuring themselves young and denying them a chance for the national team. Most kids (the high level ones who are future national team material) use 24-27. Whatever that coach said to you sounds like "urban legend" more than fact.
Kento
Regular Member
Good to know Borkya.This is totally true. Young, fit late teen/early 20's players couldn't care less about their equipment. An ex-national team (Chinese) coach once played with a child's racket (the small ones with like 18 pound tension) and he kicked everyone in my clubs ass, haha. Young people would rather practice smashes, footwork and improve their abs because they are young and energetic and broke! So they take when they can get with equipment.
Meanwhile it is the older players that obsess about racket tension and whatever latest gizmo Yonex or Victor has come out with, thinking that technology can improve where the body is lacking. Also, only adults can afford to restring rackets every few weeks and buy brand name stuff!
You know you are good when you can borrow a no name racket from the courts that haven't been re-strung in so long that no one knows what it was originally strung at and STILL win a club game. If you are so concerned about a few pounds making or breaking your game, your head isn't in the right place for the kind of improvements you really need to make.
Also, I concur with Cheung. I live and train in China and see lots of kids. Chinese kids aren't playing with rackets strung at 30 pounds. While they do start playing at age 4 and 5, parents and coaches are WAYYYYY too worried about the kid injuring themselves young and denying them a chance for the national team. Most kids (the high level ones who are future national team material) use 24-27. Whatever that coach said to you sounds like "urban legend" more than fact.
I think clarification all round has been made and all parties involved have come to an agreement with regard to the original wording that I used and so the matter has been dealt with.
Competitive juniors usually get sponsorships from equipment vendors; they get to pick best rackets they want.
As for the ex-pro beating up everyone at club level, would he use the same child's racket to play competitive games? If not, why not?
Borkya
Regular Member
I'm not talking about pro's, I'm talking about normal club players who have ti buy everything themselves. I see there is an advantage to pro's using the best/most suitable equipment because everyone is at such a high level and even an quarter inch of an advantage will help.
But the OP isn't a pro playing on a major stage with the world's best players. Us mere mortal amateur players think the fancy new racket can help us, when really what we need is just more training.
(And the ex-pro could certainly beat even the top club players with a child's racket anytime, but he's not allowed to enter common tournaments. He can only enter the invitational/pro tournaments where his competition is his level. Although I would love to see a pro player level tournament where they did play with kids rackets! It was actually totally amusing watching him play with it. Especially serves and some net stuff was hilarious to watch and he had everyone cracking up.)
I first have to admit I haven't read all posts on this thread in detail. OP first post seems to ask for analysis/advice, and then suddenly the thread turned to rackets and strings.
I've some observations w.r.t. the discussions in this forum. From time to time, topics are trivialized. E.g. when it's appropriate to suggest not to play too many clears, cross-court shots, the suggestions some time turn into never play those shots at all.
As to equipments, I feel we could have some properly qualified discussion, as opposed to be dismissive. Of course, equipments such as rackets, string tensions, and string gauges are important considerations, at least to some extent. I also agree that everything is relative. If one is making gross errors, or don't know how to play, the improvement his equipment could provide would be buried by those gross errors. Same can be said about mental, physical, and tactical aspects.
Importance of rackets (and by extension other equipment related topics) could be highlighted as follows -
1. When the pros compete at their levels, they use (much) better rackets, if not the "best". Tensions and types of strings are also considered.
2. If you want to talk about amateurs, we could look no further but the kid in your example. Proper choice of racket (kid's racket, with shorter shaft, and lighter) clearly is important. Otherwise, he'd be using a regular size racket at the very least.
Coming out of this rat hole, I realize that some people do like to keep buying new/latest rackets (or so it seems). That would be an obsession. Having said that, I do believe gradual changes in technology could produce noticeable improvement to many club players, if they want to replace their rackets once every 5 years or so. Technology over the last 20-30 years after all made much faster and deceptive games possible [consider those wooden/graphite rackets as well as nylon vs gut strings years ago].
Then, of course training could improve one's games. I understand that, but not everyone is interested in being a perpetual student. Time and money could come into play. At whatever levels they choose to stay, just like the pros, proper choice of rackets/strings/tensions could give their games a boost (limitation as stated above notwithstanding).
Finally, as you're in China, I'd like to quote a favorite Chinese saying, something like: "If you want to do an excellent job, you need to first sharpen your tools."
Kento
Regular Member
I am a firm believer in using whatever possible to improve one's game.
I know my limitations as a badminton player. I daresay, with proper rigorous training, I can overcome the remaining shortcomings in my game adequately.
Does this mean I want to become a professional?
Of course not. I just want to excel at everything I do and that includes playing badminton and if that means having a racquet finely tuned to my strengths then so be it, whether it is a 'professional' racquet or at a 'professional' tension etc.
SimonCarter
Regular Member
Hello guys,
I am still working on most points you gave me but here is a video of my Lost finale two days ago.
I dont think i played very well but it is a typical game of tournament. I usually i have one like that one every four or five matchs. I think it is because my opponent is pushing me to the rearcourt a lot. I then play way too short imo.
Quality is not too good. I got crushed 21-10 21-18. I feel like if i have Bad habbits you should ses everything here as it was a game where i did not "thought" about my technique at all. I was just trying to hit his backhand side at some point.
I feel like my stance is a tiny bit better but not great. And my serve is still terrible... I will hop on a small leg injury to rest and work solely on my serve and net game.
About the discussion on string tension i found it interesting but this post is also to try to Come back to the subject of this thread trying to make me a less Bad player! Which i feel you already made me better in a short Time! (People told me that i was pkaying better and that's hearth warmi g) thanks guys for the advices.
I am still working on most points you gave me but here is a video of my Lost finale two days ago.
I dont think i played very well but it is a typical game of tournament. I usually i have one like that one every four or five matchs. I think it is because my opponent is pushing me to the rearcourt a lot. I then play way too short imo.
Quality is not too good. I got crushed 21-10 21-18. I feel like if i have Bad habbits you should ses everything here as it was a game where i did not "thought" about my technique at all. I was just trying to hit his backhand side at some point.
I feel like my stance is a tiny bit better but not great. And my serve is still terrible... I will hop on a small leg injury to rest and work solely on my serve and net game.
About the discussion on string tension i found it interesting but this post is also to try to Come back to the subject of this thread trying to make me a less Bad player! Which i feel you already made me better in a short Time! (People told me that i was pkaying better and that's hearth warmi g) thanks guys for the advices.
s_mair
Regular Member
Interesting match to watch, thanks for sharing! Overall, your opponent put a lot of pressure on you and moved you around a lot which made you play a lot of high risk shots with the expected higher error rate. He on the other hand played a super safe game with pretty much zero unforced errors. Definitely a tough one to beat, even if his technique doesn't look super fancy at first sight.
And even if you've mentioned it yourself, there is one thing that jumps at me during the whole match: Your serve. You've played a lot of flick serves which got countered pretty badly by your opponent from the beginning till the end. You increased the number of short serves towards the end of game one, but still your opponent managed to apply pressure with his return of serve shots.
Now have a look at your opponent's serves. He varies beatifully between good long and high forehand serves, short forehand serves and backhand serves which made it extremely difficult for you to adapt to it. And if you ask me, it was the long/high forehand serve that was the one to put most pressure on you.
So my advice would be to work on the quality of your backhand serve and to start working on your forehand serve (with different heights and flight curves) as well. At this level, it's still a weapon that can cause a lot of trouble for many opponents without them even be aware of it - they just wonder why their smash returns from far back can get countered so badly with short blocks and why their drop shots are missing a lot of the usual precision.
I regularly wonder why so many players at "our" level are using mostly backhand serves in singles. Most of them are clearly lacking the speed and footwork so safely cover the whole court for the third shot of the rally. And personally, I really like to play against that kind of opponent. You can put them under so much pressure with only minimum deception and variability on the return of serve shot. On the other hand, I loathe opponents with a consistent and precise deep high serve since they force you to start the rally already with one foot off court and a wide open void in front of you - which is always a bad position to be in.
Last edited:
Totally agree with above comment about the backhand serve in singles.
Due to my age (47) and skill level, I tend to stick with the deep high serves. My consistency in backhand short serves have improved a lot since playing doubles but I rarely use it in singles as I can’t cover my backhand rear court quick enough. Knowing this limitation I practice my deep high serves to try and improve length, height and most importantly consistency.
A flick serve in my opinion is to try and win the point or gain an advantage by putting your opponent unbalanced in the first shot of the rally through deception. This only really works if you serve enough short serves and throw in the odd flick to be deceptive meaning you better be good covering your backhand rear court when you serve short.
A good long serve may not be deceptive but it can still win the point if it’s deep enough to cause doubt in your opponent’s mind on whether it’s in or out. Look back at the video and you’ll see that you did win points by sending your opponent to the back during rallies so why not start the rally sending him back?
I’ve been in the same situation where I’ve been
told on bad days that my opponent didn’t win the game but I lost it to them.
Due to my age (47) and skill level, I tend to stick with the deep high serves. My consistency in backhand short serves have improved a lot since playing doubles but I rarely use it in singles as I can’t cover my backhand rear court quick enough. Knowing this limitation I practice my deep high serves to try and improve length, height and most importantly consistency.
A flick serve in my opinion is to try and win the point or gain an advantage by putting your opponent unbalanced in the first shot of the rally through deception. This only really works if you serve enough short serves and throw in the odd flick to be deceptive meaning you better be good covering your backhand rear court when you serve short.
A good long serve may not be deceptive but it can still win the point if it’s deep enough to cause doubt in your opponent’s mind on whether it’s in or out. Look back at the video and you’ll see that you did win points by sending your opponent to the back during rallies so why not start the rally sending him back?
I’ve been in the same situation where I’ve been
told on bad days that my opponent didn’t win the game but I lost it to them.
A prime example of how your game went
4:14 to 4:45
4 points going 2 to each player.
1st point 4:14 you won by playing a deep clear leaving your opponent doubting the length
2nd point was poor flick serve giving your opponent a choice of easy drop or smash
3rd point you won by playing a very nice slice across the net
4th point was a Christmas present.
Just over 30 seconds and all points were won and lost by you Simon
You are more than capable of beating the guy and the second point is a prime example.
I also noticed you play a lot of shots towards your opponent so you’re not really making him move much meaning you’re doing all the hard work when he plays away from you. You did win the points when you played away
4:14 to 4:45
4 points going 2 to each player.
1st point 4:14 you won by playing a deep clear leaving your opponent doubting the length
2nd point was poor flick serve giving your opponent a choice of easy drop or smash
3rd point you won by playing a very nice slice across the net
4th point was a Christmas present.
Just over 30 seconds and all points were won and lost by you Simon
You are more than capable of beating the guy and the second point is a prime example.
I also noticed you play a lot of shots towards your opponent so you’re not really making him move much meaning you’re doing all the hard work when he plays away from you. You did win the points when you played away
SimonCarter
Regular Member
Thanks guys for the extensive replies.
On the serve part I have switched to backhand serve to make me work on net play and backhand coverage more. Then i got used to it.
I can still serve high forehand and I do it sometimes but I do not feel confident to switch during the match plus I was scared from his smash so I did not want to give him any opportunities for that. I agree that he was put off when I managed to play deep enough so I should have started serving long forehand.
I feel like I was not dictating the pace enough (I usually try to do it a lot more). But I do not know if that was him playing good and hindering my ability to do so or just me not getting in the right mindset. I agree I counted the points I lost and I think around 20 of them are because I played directly at my opponent for no reason. Around 8 were because of bad serves.
Despite the score it was an interesting and fun match. I feel like I could have done better and my serve is definitely something I am going to work on (starting this afternoon, planning on serving for a good hour at least)
On the serve part I have switched to backhand serve to make me work on net play and backhand coverage more. Then i got used to it.
I can still serve high forehand and I do it sometimes but I do not feel confident to switch during the match plus I was scared from his smash so I did not want to give him any opportunities for that. I agree that he was put off when I managed to play deep enough so I should have started serving long forehand.
I feel like I was not dictating the pace enough (I usually try to do it a lot more). But I do not know if that was him playing good and hindering my ability to do so or just me not getting in the right mindset. I agree I counted the points I lost and I think around 20 of them are because I played directly at my opponent for no reason. Around 8 were because of bad serves.
Despite the score it was an interesting and fun match. I feel like I could have done better and my serve is definitely something I am going to work on (starting this afternoon, planning on serving for a good hour at least)
speCulatius
Regular Member
When you have a good high serve, a smash by your opponent is the answer that's easiest for you, you just have to serve to the middle and high and long enough (consistently between 10 cm in front of the line and right on it), then your opponent has to get out of the court to smash. That's the point @s_mair was making. Furthermore, a smash gives you an the pace you need to work with and start the really controlling the pace. When serving not too far away from the center, it's easy to cover all the angles.
If you don't have that confidence and consistency for your long, high forehand serve, work on it.
SimonCarter
Regular Member
I agree with and right now I don't have enough faith in my long high forehand serve.
I think my defense is pretty good (helped by a light small frame racket) so I am going to work on that long serve.
Thanks for the advices. I am resting for a good two weeks (but I can work on my serve while resting my legs). Next tournament is start of March I will try to be ready with a better serve by then. Hopefully it will end better than a loss in finale (level will be higher than last one tho).
Thanks again for your time guys !
s_mair
Regular Member
I've been in your exact situation while ago. So maybe my old thread regarding the issue might help you a bit as well:
https://r.tapatalk.com/shareLink?sh...deep-high-forehand-serve.175310/&share_type=t
In a nutshell: The biggest improvements for me brought dropping the shuttle farther away from my body and gripping the racket ever so slightly towards a backhand grip. The keep your wrist relaxed before the stroke and perform a relaxed follow through in the desired flight direction. It's all about gaining control of the serve shot.
In the meantime, I feel really comfortable with my forehand serve. And it's still the serve that lets me enter a really in a neutral position and gives me more chances to control the pace myself. If I get pushed around by my opponent with the return of serve already, it's not the way I want to start a rally by standard.
SimonCarter
Regular Member
Thanks for the link it has been an interesting read!
I will work on various targets while serving. However do you use old shuttles for practice or new ones? I feel like I would be wasting shuttles with new ones but the old ones will have random trajectories ...