Need recommendation for a heavy yonex racket

Discussion in 'Racket Recommendation / Comparison' started by Zohar, Feb 17, 2020.

  1. Zohar

    Zohar Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2017
    Messages:
    163
    Likes Received:
    24
    Location:
    NZ
    Probably; but I have powerful shots.
     
  2. LenaicM

    LenaicM Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2018
    Messages:
    1,280
    Likes Received:
    1,035
    Location:
    Europe
    Is your game solely based on power? What about controlling the net with such tension? Drops and net strokes must be penalized.

    Besides, isn't using a heavy racket + such a low tension redundant in terms of power access?

    I don't know about your level of play but 3U is already heavy enough for most of us. Even a few pro players, including single MS stars are using or used 4U at some point.

    Also if you are after power, a higher tension will surely reduce the area of the sweet spot but given you consistently hit the actual sweet spot, you will generate much more power with higher tension.
     
  3. s_mair

    s_mair Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    Messages:
    5,366
    Likes Received:
    4,152
    Location:
    Germany
    If you think that the correlation "lower tension = more power" is so easy and simple, then you are mistaken. Big time.

    There is a sweet spot for string tension in terms of maximum power, and that sweet spot depends a lot on your racket swing speed and style. So the only way that a super low tension will really give you extra power would be if you have a super slow-motion swing. But afair we've been on this topic once before, so not sure if it makes sense to discuss it again. However, if you ask me, that ultra-low tension plays a huge role in this equation and your original issue.

    Regardless, if you're looking for decent head heavy Yonex rackets, then look at the AX88D, AX99 (and no, it is not head light!) or even a Voltric LDF - and of course the ZF2 as kind of the the mothership of all head heavy rackets (and simply ignore all that marketing gibberish...). But looking at the overall picture, I doubt that a change in rackets will bring you the expected boost.
     
    #23 s_mair, Feb 21, 2020
    Last edited: Feb 21, 2020
  4. Budi

    Budi Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2019
    Messages:
    1,845
    Likes Received:
    878
    Location:
    Indonesia
    with those low tension it will have totaly bad control & i really doubt it would give that much power unless you have very weak swing like a fresh beginner player.

    Maximum power is gain when you can sync your swing power & speed with your racket shaft flex & also your stringbed bouncy. When you swing & hitting timing at the right moment when your racket shaft bend back forward & at the same time when the string bed bounce back, it will result powerfull stroke. Miss that & it will reduce your power instead. Have you try higher tension like maybe 22 or 24? Im sure its still good for general intermediate player to play without to much struggle.

    For comparison my Lining MP UC5000 & TK770. My lining is more flex than my TK770, but have the same 27lbs tension. My most powerfull smash is when i use TK770 as its flex & tension sync good with my swing, but using my Lining my full smash become ackward as it didnt sync well. But when im just want a smash, simply lazy swing would give me good power stroke more powerfull compare to my TK770, but this smash would never overpower my full smash with my TK770.
     
  5. Zohar

    Zohar Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2017
    Messages:
    163
    Likes Received:
    24
    Location:
    NZ
    I got two rackets:
    - A new z-force 2, strung with 16lbs, 3u.
    - A second hand nanoray 900, (already) strung with 24lbs, 3u (as a backup racket).

    I started with 24lbs, and over the years I lowered the tension. I like the soft feel, larger sweet spot, and more power.
    Yes, my net-play isn't too good.

    If it's the same person with the same technique, then it comes down to the racket. I prefer physics-based arguments rather than sell stunts. Momentum depends on speed and mass, and lower tension generates more repulsion. I didn't feel any difference in terms of shaft stiffness (zf2 vs astrox 77).

    So far, I like the zf2, although at times, mostly when I'm tired, the racket feels sluggish and too heavy. But I think I need to get used to it.
     
  6. Ouchie

    Ouchie Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2018
    Messages:
    426
    Likes Received:
    244
    Location:
    UK
    I am interested in your reasoning for this. I understand the potential energy should be higher but there is a finite amount of time that the shuttle is in contact with the string to be able to apply any force to stretch the string.
     
    #26 Ouchie, Mar 12, 2020
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2020
  7. Budi

    Budi Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2019
    Messages:
    1,845
    Likes Received:
    878
    Location:
    Indonesia
    i think its more complicated than that even when both player have the same skill level.
    1. If its the same racket, let say AX88D. 3U user will be able to bit more harder which easier to penetrate opposite defense so he had good potential to win than 4U user than hit less harder which easier to block. But didnt 4U have better manouver for fast exchange where 3U user would be more struggle on fast play.
    2. If its different racket, let say ZF2 vs ARC11. ZF2 user would be unleasing destructive rocket to the opposite aggresive & deadly, while ARC11 only throwing a little bullet that is little treatening. But isnt ARC11 easier to control that makes defense more enjoyable than ZF2. So both will even out each other.

    Coz of that i think its not the racket but its our strategy that matter. Our skill level might be the same, our racket can be anything, but our mind will never be the same. You cant read my mind, so do i cant read yours, unless you are twins:D.
     
  8. Zohar

    Zohar Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2017
    Messages:
    163
    Likes Received:
    24
    Location:
    NZ
    @Ouchie, it feels counter intuitive since the string feels so tensed, and the response time is so short for us to feel any stretch. Nevertheless, most people are very particular about their string tension, so I guess it matters. If you don't feel any difference between playing with 16lbs and 30lbs, then it's fine. But if you do, then what creates the difference between them is what I said -- repulsion. At least, this is what I read about, and I didn't see any other opinion on the matter:
    Lower tension means that the string stretches more, then it creates more repulsion = more power = less control (same thing all of them, and sell gimmicks are nonsense).

    I don't think there's more to it.
    Nevertheless, if I do try to think about it some more, I may say:
    With a weak shot, such as a net shot or a drop, the string would stretch less than a strong shot, such as a smash or a clear. Therefore, with low tension, I'm not really supposed to feel the control loss so much on the weak shots, but I would feel more power on the strong shots.
    Since most people prefer as high tension as possible, then it's probably not the case, and even weak shots are affected enough by the tension (and I find this more counter intuitive).

    @Budi, momentum = mass x velocity. 3U won't give you more power if you swing the racket, e.g., in half the speed. Other technique considerations that you mentioned are personal preference. So, I'm not saying everyone should go with 3U, but this is my personal choice related to my play style.

    On the subject, people usually play with a 3U singles and with a 4U doubles. I play with the same racket for both, but otherwise, with my play style it would have been the other way around:
    - In my singles game, the power of the smash doesn't matter so much -- either the opponent was ready or he wasn't; the speed of the shuttle doesn't seem too important. Then, with a lighter racket, I maneuver much faster, e.g. I react and defend against smashes much faster.
    - In my doubles game, I mostly try to hit rockets from the back, and they should be strong enough so my partner would capitalize on the return. With a light racket, it's like I'm doing nothing, and at times, the opponent stands cheekily near the front unworried.
     
  9. s_mair

    s_mair Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    Messages:
    5,366
    Likes Received:
    4,152
    Location:
    Germany
    Mate, you have been told multiple times by various people that you logic is lacking. If you feel good with your 16 lbs., then fine, go on with it. But please stop spreading that utterly wrong theory here cause it might give a wrong impression on other readers here.

    And just out of curiousity - why did you stop at 16 lbs.? If your theroy is correct, then going further down to 10 lbs. or even 5 lbs. should be boosting the power even further.
     
    LenaicM and speCulatius like this.
  10. shreyas666

    shreyas666 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2016
    Messages:
    1,331
    Likes Received:
    271
    Occupation:
    chief mis-information officer
    Location:
    not in outer space
    Z strike 2 u.
     
  11. Zohar

    Zohar Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2017
    Messages:
    163
    Likes Received:
    24
    Location:
    NZ
    @s_mair, I'm sorry, please refresh my memory. I iterated a few points. Which of them you don't exactly agree with, and what's your alternative theory?
    I assume you don't refer to my Newtonian mechanics explanation, right? Otherwise, I believe I was careful to say when it's my own feel/opinion/taste.

    Why stop at 16lbs? Good question. I don't break the string that often, and it costs $40 to restring. So I don't have much play room to experiment, although I would find it interesting. So, I guess I play it safe and aim high as everyone suggests -- as high a tension as I can tolerate.
     
  12. s_mair

    s_mair Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    Messages:
    5,366
    Likes Received:
    4,152
    Location:
    Germany
    In short:
    Longer version:
    https://www.badmintoncentral.com/fo...-the-ideal-tension.12569/page-27#post-2537505

    A string under high tension stores more potential energy but it needs a higher swing speed to actually get it transferred to the shuttle. So basically, you need the shuttle so "sink" into the stringbed and to push it out in sync with the rest of the swing. If you have a very, very slow swing, then you will benefit from a lower tension (but this will not compensate the missing power due to the slow swing to start with!). As soon as you improve your technique and you increase the racket head speed along the way, you will benefit from higher tensions.

    Again, if your personal sweet spot is at 16 lbs., then stick with it. But the equation "less tension = more power" is not as easy and bottom line not correct.
     
  13. Budi

    Budi Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2019
    Messages:
    1,845
    Likes Received:
    878
    Location:
    Indonesia
    The only reason why one use low tension is because they are still beginner. Whatever they lack for power or proper technique to perform a good stroke. I play twice a week on different club & the lowest tension used by others is 24lbs, tho there is still some little that is hardheaded thinking higher is better & one of them even use 33lbs.

    Low tension = more repulsion = more power.
    At some point its true, but there is limit to what a bouncy string bed can do to add a power boost on a stroke. If you have grow with better power or technique resulting higher swing force, higher tension will benefit you more as to loosen string will absorb the power instead of repel it back.

    For example, my 2 racket.
    Lining Mega Power UC5000, medium flex.
    Victor Thruster K770HTi, medium stiff (not to much stiff but stiffer than my UC5000)
    Both 27lbs.
    When im tired or not serious playing, i use my UC5000. It easier to use as its more flex than my TK770. My smash (just a smash) feel much more powerfull than my TK770 with the help of shaft snap back effect. But for my full power smash is weaker than my TK770. The UC5000 flex/snap back effect doesnt work in optimal way to help my smash. So my most deadly powerfull destructive smash is performed with TK770.
    The concept of string tension is pretty much more or less similar to shaft stiffness.

    So with 16lbs, i really doubt how you could play a power shot & able to play in a competitive match (let alone a tournament level regardless regional/national). Well, its still your personal preference but still i cant imagine myself to perform better in my club games with those 16lbs tension. It would be to bouncy for controling over the net or flat drive & wont be powerfull enough as it would absorb my power shot instead of releasing it back.
     
  14. Ouchie

    Ouchie Regular Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2018
    Messages:
    426
    Likes Received:
    244
    Location:
    UK
    @Zohar There appears to be a difference of opinions :D Subtle differences in opinion but I don't doubt your findings are anything but the truth - maths proves it. However, with the various constants and variables in the calculations the human element is a huge variable.

    I like a bit of physics and I like to learn more to at least understand the reasoning. There appears to be a good understanding in archery about how string effects arrow trajectory. Archery has a draw weight variable but that is simply somebody pulling a string back a certain length. We can simulate the equivalent of draw weight by striking the shuttle. Assuming the string moves linearly.

    So, we understand that the longer a string stretches the more stored energy is has (elastic potential energy calculation) so it will give more repulsion and more repulsion means greater shuttle speed. The difference can be the personal preference about the amount of time that a shuttle is in contact with the string bed during a full swing. This can also be called dwell time or hold time. Less dwell time is better for a responsive feel but more could be better for extracting maximum energy from the strings.

    I am so tempted to hand string a racket at ludicrously low tension but the problem will be strings moving around and energy being lost to the sideways movement. Which makes me think that a harmonic/oscillation calculation might clarify the way the strings behave under 2 different tensions. We want the strings to move in only 1 direction, if they shift sideways under load then they are not going to put energy back into the shuttle in the right direction. I wonder where the lower limit is? I remember having to straighten strings a lot more playing with 16-18lbs than now at 27+.
     
    LenaicM likes this.
  15. Budi

    Budi Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2019
    Messages:
    1,845
    Likes Received:
    878
    Location:
    Indonesia
    personally i would find 22-24 is more enjoyable to play without to much strain on me. Easy power without to much effort. 26-27 lbs i use right now is coz i want to get abit of control so i want to kill the bouncy abit. Once i play with friend racket VT1DG 30lbs. I can still play with it but i just dont like the feel playing with frying pad:p
     
  16. Zohar

    Zohar Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2017
    Messages:
    163
    Likes Received:
    24
    Location:
    NZ
    @s_mair, you pointed out to an interesting but very long (30 pages) discussion. I read a few comments around the discussion anchor that you referenced as well as skimmed the two articles:

    https://www.researchgate.net/public...e_allows_effective_use_of_all_string_tensions

    http://web.archive.org/web/20200313...badminton-could-be-doing-more-harm-than-good/

    Maybe someday I'll read it more thoroughly. In the end, though, I go with what I feel.

    The opinions on the effects of string tension on the shot quality vary and contradict from east to west even on the research level.
    I don't believe you got the physics right about the potential energy. If I read it correctly, they all agree that on the basic mechanics level (disregarding other factors), the lower tension would produce higher repulsion and thus more speed.

    Something new that I got from there was about control. I always thought it was mainly about not being able to control the bounciness in precision shots, such as net shots. Larger sweet spot in the spring bed and more dwell time would increase the variation of the return angle of the shuttle. This means that you lose control of the direction the shuttle is going.

    In experiments that they did with professionals, the professional were able to compensate for both extreme tensions:
    - In low tension, they were still able to get accurate placement.
    - In high tension, they were still able to get the same powerful shot by giving a stronger final snap of wrist and fingers (with fatigue cost).

    Then, they give a rule of thumb for the recommended tension for the player level and statistics about preference.

    To summarize, while lower tension gives you the power you need _more easily_, you lose control (return angle of the shuttle), but players can compensate for both. There's no agreement on a golden rule, and in the end it comes down to a matter of preference.

    Therefore, I think I'm okay when I'm saying that I prefer the feel of 16lbs because I get more power _easily_ at the expense of control (although, I don't feel that my shuttle direction is bad, but my net play can be improved, which I'm not sure is related to the racket -- we are not talking about that amount of bounciness).
    To clarify, both of us (you playing with 30lbs and me with 16lbs) can get the same amount of power and control (on paper). The question is how hard each of us need to work (or compensate) for it.
     
    #36 Zohar, Mar 13, 2020
    Last edited: Mar 13, 2020
  17. s_mair

    s_mair Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    Messages:
    5,366
    Likes Received:
    4,152
    Location:
    Germany
    Like I said several times now - if you feel good with it, then that’s all it counts.

    Last attempt to explain why “less tension = more power” is not fully correct.
    Regarding physics, let’s make an analogy with a bow and arrow.

    Take a bow and use a low tension on the string. In parallel, take the same bow again with a higher tension on the string.

    Now you take the arrow into both bows and pull both strings the same distance backwards. Now you shoot. I don’t think that you disagree with the fact that the arrow from the high tension string will travel faster, right?
    Thing is that you need to apply more force to the higher tension string to bend it the same distance than the low tension one with results in more “stored energy” in the string. But if you’re strong enough to do that, the maximum repulsion coming from the string is higher.

    Converted to badminton, if you can accelerate the racket head enough to bend a high tension stringbed you will get more repulsion from it compared to a lower tension stringbed that is bent equally (with a lower racket head speed). So that’s why the “optimal” tension depends on the player and the swing.
    BUT: If you are able to sufficiently bend the high tension stringbed with a good technique and a high racket head speed, the maximum available repulsion power from the string is higher.

    Now you can say “but if you hit the low tension racket with the same head speed, the string will be bent even more which will result in the same amount of stored energy!”.
    That is correct. But it will take a longer period of time to transfer that energy then back to the shuttle on the rebound which will then no longer be in sync with the rest of the swing. In other words, The shuttle will still be on the stringbed when the actual hit is already over. And that’s why a pro simply player won’t be able to hit 400+ kph smashes with a 16 lbs. racket. Period.

    If anyone else finds a major flaw in my logic, then please point it out. I’m always happy to learn.
     
    speCulatius and LenaicM like this.
  18. Budi

    Budi Regular Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2019
    Messages:
    1,845
    Likes Received:
    878
    Location:
    Indonesia
    Its fine if you really enjoy 16lbs but seriously... Not being rude but i question your skill playing with 16lbs.

    The only reason use such low tension is that you had very very terible low swing speed which basically is what a low level doing where they had totaly bad technique.

    On my Sunday Club, there is a coach on other court training a junior player aged from maybe 6 to 10. Once i pickup this slim small little girl & even tho her string is not as tight as mine 27lbs but its wont be bellow 20 for sure. Maybe 20 or 22 lbs & she able to perform clear hit without problem. So if a little girl with much less muscle from regular adult able to do it, then its not a matter of strength but more of technique which makes me doubt on your skill.
     
  19. Zohar

    Zohar Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2017
    Messages:
    163
    Likes Received:
    24
    Location:
    NZ
    @Budi, if you happen to be in NZ, I'd be happy if you invite me to a singles game ;)

    @s_mair, I think it's the first time that you go into specifics, giving a full detailed argument.

    Consider two identical trampolines, one with spring tension double the other. You jump on both of them (same mass from the same height). On which one would you bounce more?

    Consider two identical bows, one with string tension double the other. You pull the arrow back on both with the same amount of force. Which one would shoot farther?

    Consider two identical badminton rackets, one with string tension double the other. You hit the shuttle with the same speed with both rackets. Which shot would be more powerful -- faster (and by how much)?

    You'd say yes, of course, but like Zohar quoted from the research paper, I (s_mair) would invest more power (using a flick of the wrist and fingers) to get the same speed from the high tension, which would cause me more fatigue, and I'm fine with that. Not only that, in this case, the response from the high tension string would be faster (agreed), which I (s_mair) think is crucial here (I disagree) and was missed by the paper (as far as I skimmed it).
    If that's how you feel, then it's fine. But it's not backed up as the main reason (as far as my 5min read goes), so please, express yourself with more care "(')cause it might give a (the) wrong impression on (to) other readers here." ;)

    Actually, I disagree with "a pro simply player won’t be able to hit 400+ kph smashes with a 16 lbs," which you sound absolutely confident about (you even put a period! :) ). Why are you so sure he won't be able to do this fraction of a second difference sync?
    Who said again that a sync is needed?
    Can you back up all of this?
    Actually, I've already quoted from the paper that a pro can compensate for speed and placement in both tensions. So, you don't need to look it up, and you are wrong according to this paper ;)
     
    #39 Zohar, Mar 14, 2020
    Last edited: Mar 14, 2020
  20. s_mair

    s_mair Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2013
    Messages:
    5,366
    Likes Received:
    4,152
    Location:
    Germany
    Reality in professional badminton for many years without a single known exception is enough backup for me. You are the one with the opinion and theory that goes against the seen reality, so it’s you who have to back up your revolutionary theory, not me. Nice try to shift that around.

    To get this topic to some kind of end, let’s agree to disagree. I’m done with playing Don Quijote.
     
    speCulatius and LenaicM like this.

Share This Page