I have noticed in a few threads (reviews and comparisons of rackets) that people can describe a smash as “heavy” or “fast” but not together eg a JS10 can produce “fast” smashes while a ZF2 can produce “heavy” smashes My assumption is that heavy smashes are associated with more carry through during smash eg 3U racket or more HH and that the smash does not slow down as fast during flight because of this carry through while “fast” smashes are associated with faster swinging rackets so the initial speed is high (coming off the string bed) but slow down faster? This could be entirely wrong (as it is my assumption) but does anyone know: 1) Is there a “fast” and “heavy” smash? 2) What is the cause?
There some assumtion to it This is based on my experience & assumtion, so no scientific fact or the correct answer. I own 2 racket i mainly use. Victor TK770 3U & Adidas Wucht P8 4U. I smash harder with TK770 yet faster with P8. So here the assumtion: 1. Shuttle hold When i hit a shuttle, TK770 feel had slight delay before the shuttle bounce back, while otherhand P8 almost instantly goes away. The hold could cause the slowness but as its like charging all its force, when bounce back it carry full energy from you kinetic chain movement. 2. Sound TK770 smash sound KABOM!!! Yet P8 abit dampened. Coz badminton are fast games that rely alot on reflex, with dampened P8, opponent dont know when to react thus feel like its faster. While TK770 with its shocking sound tho its more powerfull but it give clear input to opponent to react to it, so its feel slower. 3. Shuttle spin Spinning shuttle can cut through air easier thus makes it faster. While non spin one forcing itself breaking the air barrier so its slower but as its forced, it carry alot of force thus feel heavier. No one know the right answer as there is some thread discuss it yet no solid proof for every argument & im to lazy to experiment with it but just enjoy the sports. Hope that could lighten your thirsty for knowledge alittle bit.
Cheers for the informative response I think all 3 you mentioned above could play some role in the perceived “fast” or “heavy” smash I especially like the shuttle hold idea; it makes sense that if the racket has a little bit of hold then it can store more energy prior to release rather than one where less time is spent on the string bed. Rackets like the arc11 would therefore in theory have a good power potential although you would need to get the timing down with regards to the release (which in turn is influenced by the string properties and tension). I guess with the right string set up and timing; any racket could hit “fast” or “heavy” smashes but some rackets are inherently better for one than the other. Food for thought
From what I have noticed, I think the idea they racquets with some more shuttle hold can produce heavy smashes holds true. A guy that I play with was able to smash heavier with an arc11 over an 88d. But perhaps shaft stiffness was another factor playing into it. The best way to be able to test this would be to take a racquet and make it so that one has more shuttle hold than the other, while trying to keep every other aspect the same as much as possible. Sent from my Pixel 4a using Tapatalk
Agreed and this goes into “repulsive” and “shuttle hold” -> best example of shuttle hold being the arc11 (and pro which I have heard have even greater shuttle hold effect). My understanding here is very limited though; I do not know what contributes to a racket/frame having higher shuttle hold or repulsion but from personal experience I felt that the arc11 (2018 red version with bits of white) and astrox 88s pro “held” the shuttle and I was able to make really nice drop shots but I could not hit smashes very well for some reason. I suspect for the arc11, the frame is “softer” or more flexible while the different string pattern in the ax88sp could have contributed to these -> softer frame and wider spacing in hitting area (centre) of stringbed are good at absorbing energy. The problem I have had though is that the release of said energy (I couldn’t time properly). It would be interesting if there was a metric to measure shuttle-hold and then it would be possible to perform a test above as you mentioned
