Alot of people says to smash using forehand grip without altering the angle of the racket. The guy below advises a forehand grip plus a small rotation of about 10 degree which will leave your racket not angled. He advises by using a 10 degree rotation you avoid slicing the shuttle. When you smash without changing the angle you are naturally slicing the shuttle Is this correct? He's the only guy I found that preaches this and his comments are disabled.
Having a little bit of slice isnt the worst thing in the world. Are you slicing when you smash and don’t want to? Then change it. Maybe you can try what they suggested. If you’re not slicing, then there's no reason to change.
We've had that topic sooooo many times. First of all, I think you forgot to link a video. Then... I have to guess what you're talking about, but I'll say I agree with the guy I don't see. Let's go through it once again.... when smashing, you want [need] to hit the shuttle in front of you, rather than above you that way you'll automatically get a downward angle and only then you really can use the kinetic chain to get power the further in front of your body you hit the shuttle, the more you need to rotate the grip towards panhandle [in order to not slice] this is a very subtle movement, don't overdo it when full smashing, you don't want to lose any power, thus you really don't want to slice I think that sums it up.
If you know we have had the topic before "so many times", then you might know who "the guy" is? The guy with the video saying about that, mentioned so many times when the topic has been brought up, is Lee Jai Bok. This topic re LJB, saying that, has come up before. And your agreement that you state in this thread, is not what anybody has [normally] said when the subject has been mentioned before. If you are going to agree with him, and you are aware of threads on this before, then you should also point out that your view is a controversial one. And despite that the topic has been mentioned many times before, You may be the first person to agree with him! And you even agree with him without reservation! Now, if you want to sit there in agreement, that's fine, though you should really make clear that your view is a controversial one or, not mainstream(to say the least), and i'm all for people justifying their ideas with reasons but I don't see you defending your position.either! You make some points that repeat what other people have correctly said re overhead technique.e.g. use the kinetic chain,. and i'm not talking about that. I'm talking about what the poster asked about re the turning of the racket method for forehand overhead technique i.e. what the questioner asked about!
I'm aware of those videos on forehand overhead technique. They have been discussed before. He may have disabled comments because of all the critical comments he got! (He actually did two videos, a short one, then later, a longer one on it to address some of the criticism, without explicitly mentioning it). When somebody disables comments, and removed them all, that can tell you something. And indeed, the comments were numerous and critical, and he didn't respond. His techniques can be useful at a basic level, but has some weaknesses that some have pointed out, and is not mainstream. And some coaches have pointed out to me that he himself when he played at a high level, did not do what he teaches! Sometimes an unconventional grip might be OK for a person that isn't hitting it right, at least to try. But, if doing that then that should be said and explained! (Rather than taught as "this is how", when he's pretty much the only person saying to do that on forehand overheads)
And I was reminded again why my list of two people includes you. So special... My view is not controversial. At the time I replied, no video was linked and I clearly stated that. LBJ exaggerates a lot. Again, here's what I wrote. You seem to have problems with this point. Just try hitting a shuttle cleanly with a neutral grip and a neutral wrist, when the arm is stretched out in front of you. Please share a video of that.
Badminton has moved to Clifton hunter high school, Franksound road and practice sessions are on Thursday evenings 730 to 1030 and Sunday afternoons 1.oo pm to 430. All are welcome, from beginners to advance level
Cayman islands badminton club meets twice per week at Clifton hunter school, franksound road,Breakers, Grand Cayman Thursdays and Sundays
If you don't want to reply then don't reply. Clearly your list isn't working It's LJB not LBJ, (I know you know it's LJB, but I correct that so you don't cause others to repeat the same mistake as you there). And I wrote See "Spec" you had a long list I didn't list them all. There's no need. LJB was talking about forehand overhead technique and turning the racket. I didn't comment on that. And i'm not. You're avoiding the question, which you know is referring to LJB who discusses specifically, forehand overhead technique. And the questioner mentioned the smash. I was quite explicit where I said you were controversial. LJB, who you even referred to here, describes in the well known videos, turning the racket on overhead technique and the 10-15 degrees of turning the racket (on overhead technique), that the questioner referred to. The questioner is clearly referring to that. And you said you agree with "that guy"(LJB).. Now you say "LBJ exaggerates a lot." Again this isn't necessarily relevant to the point because you're not clear on where you think he is exaggerating. He does exaggerate sometimes in his demonstrations, sometimes intentionally.. and many badminton coaches often do.. Agreeing with LJB here, would be agreeing that the racket should be turned towards panhandle, on forehand overhead shots, to ensure hitting through. And the questioner mentions a smash. The questioner mentioned 10 degrees(Which isn't much, so you pointing out that LJB can exaggerate sometimes, is a distraction. And badminton coaches do exaggerate sometimes, it's not relevant.). Whether you think 10 degrees is an exaggeration or not, and you probably don't, the issue is whether you agree or not, and you said you agree. (LJB is at least explicit about what he thinks) The questioner rightly says "He's the only guy I found that preaches this and his comments are disabled" What i'm saying is, this has been discussed by posters here in the past, and nobody agreed at all, And you know it has been discussed in the past. Clearly a difference there. It's a controversial view.
