Although plastic trees may cost more, the convenient of it more than make up for the cost. convenience=time saved=money saved. Durabiltiy=money saved. Also, every year real tree price is going up, a plastic tree is free after the 1st year.
Now back to shuttlecocks-in one corner is Cooler with his plastics and in the opposite corner is the feathers-only player. I think it is a mismatch. It should be two separate categories-plastics for beginners in one category, and feathers for those who have graduated from beginners to intermediate or advanced. This may be the way in North America although the better players from the US West Coast-incidentally, this was the same place where some of America's great players were based-continue to be all feathers only. In Asia, it is all feathers.
u r wrong, i can punch from both corners. What i learned from plastic i can take it to feather play, like quicker reaction, and not afraid of bullet shots. Stereotyping people will get u into trouble. U said there is no world raniking players from canada. Wrong again. Keith chan, andrew debaka, bobby milroy have reached #24 to #27 world ranking before. Keith chan specifically, was a plastic player for the longest time until he was accpeted by a private club for further training at around 14. I know this because i played with him, his older brother and their buddies since 10. If any reader played at calgary, they prolly know of keith. This place is a plastic hacking club.
i got time out. because he has both plastic and feather experience, he is not bias of who or what level he can coach http://www.badmintoncalgary.ab.ca/info/clubs/listingbyname.html
Whoa, not reading this thread in a while an all this happens. Yes, it is my hunch. Unless we get a group of people in a study, nothing can be proven for sure. I stand by mine. The plastic player may use some fast power shots but a good feather player should be able to respond to it. A plastic player can practice the subtle brush and spin shots but it takes more time to adapt this to feathers if they've never practiced with it. Those are the main differences I notice. IMHO, sound, speed, drop-off, etc are more easily adapted to. My last sentence is not contradictory. It's just stating that people who may look at a group of plastic playing players should not jump to the conclusion that they are either all beginners or low level players or that feather players are higher level than plastic. A couple of weeks ago two guys made this mistake and challenged (we were on a private booked court) my friend and I to a match using their feathers...
I don't understand why cooler so vividly defend the current mavis shuttles.. Over and over you post the argument that syntetics can replace and do replace more and more natural materials in deffernet areas and applications. No body have an argument with that, so it doens't need to be repeated as a mantra It is really kicking in wide open doors Most of us would like nothing more than a good artifical shuttle. However what we are discussing the specific merits of the shuttles mentioned in this thread.. namely Yonex Mavis 350 and 300 which is using 50 years + old technology. This is NOT the future.. they are just a poor cheapo imitation of real feather shuttles, that isn't very good if you like to play competetive badminton. Could you name one professional player who would state that the Mavis shuttles are as good as the gurrent natural feather ones? My experince is that people playing exclusively here witrh plastics have much harder time to adjust to feather. But feather players can more easilly adjust (by just keeping it stupidly simple and smash even in off-positions) Its like a track and field runner.. Given rubber boots his/hers performance will be hamperd, and it will not be preffered by him/her for competition and even running for fun. But he/she would probably beat a not so trained athlete regardlesss of using real spike track shoes or rubber boots... I encourage people to use real equipment (carbon rackets and feather shuttles, and proper badminton-shoes when playing the game). Even though you could use steel-rackets, plastic shuttles, basketball-shoes, even squash rackets etc. It takes away some aspects and fun of the game... /Twobeer
My experience has been that low level recreational players should probably be using plastic. They bring a feather bird but aren't willing to shell out the money to replace it when it starts getting dinged up. So they end up playing with a feather bird that is missing a feather or is missing some tips. After a feather bird is damaged its flight path becomes less predictable and consistant than a plastic bird. If you aren't willing to replace the feather bird as soon as it's damaged and go through several birds a game, you should be using plastic. Somehow feather vs. plastic is an emotional issue instead of a practical one. Plastic birdies are designed to emulate the flight path of a feather birdie. No one seem to think that they do it very well but a plastic birdie is much closer to a new feather birdie than a damaged feather birdie.
agreed. Some feather advocates focused only the good sides of feather and comparing them to the bad side of plastic. Haven't seen any side by side comparison. I'm only highlighting the blackened out information,
then explain why feather players hated plastic so much?? and why plastic players don't seen mind playing feathers occasionally?
canada is whipping US's butt in the US open. US players must being playing too much plastic for their own good http://www.tournamentsoftware.com/sport/matches.aspx?id=22647&d=20080708
