K
knock-out
Guest
Brett,
Are you the only person on this forum who is ALWAYS right, no matter whether you really are wrong or right? It kinda seems that way--that nothing you write could possibly be incorrect. Even when your so-called logic is entirely incorrect, completely personally biased, and untrue; you seem to reserve the right to cut at others, as long as they can never take a swipe at you. Whether you are a grown-up, educated person, or a narrow minded youngster, I believe you have some learning to do.
Regarding tennis, Pete Sampras, the winningest player ever tennis happens to have the fastet serve in history, as well as the some of the sharpest returns, and he strings his racquets tighter than anyone on tour. He uses an old Wilson frame,cause none of the lightweight, newer models will handle the tight tensions he uses. As far as remembering back to high school physics to come up with your answer to this perplexing and difficult question, I take you back to the first analogy I gave to everyone, a flat basketball, or volleyball, or tennis ball, or etc., will rebound slower than a newer, air-filled ball. It's that simple, a tighter ball, or tennis racquet, or badminton racquet, or racquetball racquet will produce higher speeds than a looser or flatter one.
Are you the only person on this forum who is ALWAYS right, no matter whether you really are wrong or right? It kinda seems that way--that nothing you write could possibly be incorrect. Even when your so-called logic is entirely incorrect, completely personally biased, and untrue; you seem to reserve the right to cut at others, as long as they can never take a swipe at you. Whether you are a grown-up, educated person, or a narrow minded youngster, I believe you have some learning to do.
Regarding tennis, Pete Sampras, the winningest player ever tennis happens to have the fastet serve in history, as well as the some of the sharpest returns, and he strings his racquets tighter than anyone on tour. He uses an old Wilson frame,cause none of the lightweight, newer models will handle the tight tensions he uses. As far as remembering back to high school physics to come up with your answer to this perplexing and difficult question, I take you back to the first analogy I gave to everyone, a flat basketball, or volleyball, or tennis ball, or etc., will rebound slower than a newer, air-filled ball. It's that simple, a tighter ball, or tennis racquet, or badminton racquet, or racquetball racquet will produce higher speeds than a looser or flatter one.
Knockout, I believe that your analogy using a flat basketball is incorrect, because the issue we are discussing does not involve the elasticity or the pressure inside the projectile (ball or shuttle), especially considering that a shuttle does not have any significant abount of inside pressure or other characteristics that would cause it to bounce. The real issue here is the spring effect of the contact surface and that surface's ability to return as much energy as possible to the projectile, thus causing the projectile to accelerate on the rebound from the contact surface. I think a slightly better, although still probably imperfect, analogy might be to consider dropping a medicine ball (weighted leather ball used in weight training that does not have any significant quantity of bounce) on two surfaces from ten feet up, a trampoline and a cushioned gymnastics mat. The ball will bounce significantly higher off the trampoline than off the cushioned mat. In that case, the more spring-like surface of the trampoline will clearly create a higher bounce than the tighter, less elastic surface of the mat.
Another analogy that, while not perfect, might be relevant to this issue is a current subject of hot debate in the sport of golf, namely the tension on driver faces. The USGA has issued an equipment rule that makes illegal for competition any driver that produces a spring-like effect on the ball, as those clubs whose faces deform upon contact and then "spring" back into the ball produce drives that are 4-8% percent longer than those produced by drivers with a rigid (i.e. high tension ) clubface. This issue is covered in some detail in the February 2001 issue of Golf Digest magazine.
Again, I am not absolutely positive that the various analogous examples I have mentioned will apply to badminton. If there is a reason why string tension on a badminton racquet produces a different effect than string tension on a tennis racquet, this layperson would certainly like to know the scientific reason for it.
As for my earlier comments on tennis racquets and strings, I challenge you, Knockout, to find any reputable tennis authority who will tell you that tighter (i.e. higher than the manufactur's average recommended tension) strings result in more power than looser strings. As for your statements about Sampras, his serve was not the fastest recorded serve, at least during the history of the ATP - that record belongs to Greg Rusedski at Indian Wells, California in 1998, who was clocked at 149 mph. (See Tennis magazine, December 2000/January 2001 issue at page 13). Sampras clearly is one of the hardest hitters in the ATP, but the reason is not because his strings are tighter than any other player's - it is because of his strength, athleticsm and skill in hitting the ball in the center of the sweet spot. If power were simply a matter of cranking the strings tighter and tighter, wouldn't other players simply use a higher tension than Sampras so they could overpower him?
Last, I do not profess to be completely knowledgeable on all issues and I certainly make mistakes and errors, as we all do. When I am wrong, I do not hesitate to admit it and make any necessary apologies (which I have already done in this forum). I don't post messages on this board to make controversies or insult people - I participate in these discussions because I want to contribute toward a challenging discourse on these various issues. I am not trying to monopolize any particular topic and I welcome anyone out there to add to the discussions. I try to give examples to clarify my points, although I acknowledge that some of my postings tend to be quite long, perhaps overly long. In many cases when others on this forum have challenged my opinions, they have often used either irrelevant examples (sometimes ridiculously so) or have resulted to childish name-calling and making bald statements that aren't much different than "I'M RIGHT BECAUSE I SAID SO!" If I have made an error, then by all means please point out that error to me, showing me why I was wrong and if you can, please refer to an authority for your contention. I welcome genuinely constructive criticism, as it is an important part of any learning process. If you cannot articulate why you disagree with another person's opinion, and have to resort to criticisms like the ones you made above - groundlessly stating that a person's statements are wrong, personally biased and untrue and labelling the person as immature - then you are merely showing that you do not have anything worthwhile to say and are only venting anger or frustration.
Why don't we all try to use the actual sport of badminton, rather than discussions about it on this forum, to relieve pent-up stress and frustration? Finally, If it gives you any satisfaction or makes you feel better, I will concede that it is likely that you and most other posters on this board are far better players than I am and that I am only moderately skillful and experienced in this sport. Like everyone else, I participate in this forum because I enjoy badminton and would like to acquire knowledge that may help me become a better player.
Another analogy that, while not perfect, might be relevant to this issue is a current subject of hot debate in the sport of golf, namely the tension on driver faces. The USGA has issued an equipment rule that makes illegal for competition any driver that produces a spring-like effect on the ball, as those clubs whose faces deform upon contact and then "spring" back into the ball produce drives that are 4-8% percent longer than those produced by drivers with a rigid (i.e. high tension ) clubface. This issue is covered in some detail in the February 2001 issue of Golf Digest magazine.
Again, I am not absolutely positive that the various analogous examples I have mentioned will apply to badminton. If there is a reason why string tension on a badminton racquet produces a different effect than string tension on a tennis racquet, this layperson would certainly like to know the scientific reason for it.
As for my earlier comments on tennis racquets and strings, I challenge you, Knockout, to find any reputable tennis authority who will tell you that tighter (i.e. higher than the manufactur's average recommended tension) strings result in more power than looser strings. As for your statements about Sampras, his serve was not the fastest recorded serve, at least during the history of the ATP - that record belongs to Greg Rusedski at Indian Wells, California in 1998, who was clocked at 149 mph. (See Tennis magazine, December 2000/January 2001 issue at page 13). Sampras clearly is one of the hardest hitters in the ATP, but the reason is not because his strings are tighter than any other player's - it is because of his strength, athleticsm and skill in hitting the ball in the center of the sweet spot. If power were simply a matter of cranking the strings tighter and tighter, wouldn't other players simply use a higher tension than Sampras so they could overpower him?
Last, I do not profess to be completely knowledgeable on all issues and I certainly make mistakes and errors, as we all do. When I am wrong, I do not hesitate to admit it and make any necessary apologies (which I have already done in this forum). I don't post messages on this board to make controversies or insult people - I participate in these discussions because I want to contribute toward a challenging discourse on these various issues. I am not trying to monopolize any particular topic and I welcome anyone out there to add to the discussions. I try to give examples to clarify my points, although I acknowledge that some of my postings tend to be quite long, perhaps overly long. In many cases when others on this forum have challenged my opinions, they have often used either irrelevant examples (sometimes ridiculously so) or have resulted to childish name-calling and making bald statements that aren't much different than "I'M RIGHT BECAUSE I SAID SO!" If I have made an error, then by all means please point out that error to me, showing me why I was wrong and if you can, please refer to an authority for your contention. I welcome genuinely constructive criticism, as it is an important part of any learning process. If you cannot articulate why you disagree with another person's opinion, and have to resort to criticisms like the ones you made above - groundlessly stating that a person's statements are wrong, personally biased and untrue and labelling the person as immature - then you are merely showing that you do not have anything worthwhile to say and are only venting anger or frustration.
Why don't we all try to use the actual sport of badminton, rather than discussions about it on this forum, to relieve pent-up stress and frustration? Finally, If it gives you any satisfaction or makes you feel better, I will concede that it is likely that you and most other posters on this board are far better players than I am and that I am only moderately skillful and experienced in this sport. Like everyone else, I participate in this forum because I enjoy badminton and would like to acquire knowledge that may help me become a better player.
Effect of string tension
I don't want to criticize on another's opinion, just want to share some of my findings on the caption topic.
To me, as a player at intermediate level, I found the best power would be come from string tension of a little bit higher, but not too high. In my case, BG85 at 24+ lbs is the best. Tension below this (e.g. 22 lbs) will give noticeable less powerful smash and clear (again, for myself). On the other hand, if the tension is too high, my smash and clear will become less powerful (in addition, I need to hit harder in such a case).
I don't think I'm qualify to conclude anything, but I personally think that the best string tension (i.e. the tension which generate the optimal balance of power and control) for different people vary. I've asked the same question to one of the ex-member of HK team, and he said that people at beginner/intermediate level should use tension at 20 to 21 lbs, too high tension will result at poor control and less power (the racquet is just like a rock). For advanced level players like him, they usually use string tension at ~28 lbs, and he said that this can give them more powerful smash. He further explained that someone can only take the advantages of higher tension if he/she has more powerful wrist.
Finally, please don't laugh at me if what I said doesn't make sense to you. -
I don't want to criticize on another's opinion, just want to share some of my findings on the caption topic.
To me, as a player at intermediate level, I found the best power would be come from string tension of a little bit higher, but not too high. In my case, BG85 at 24+ lbs is the best. Tension below this (e.g. 22 lbs) will give noticeable less powerful smash and clear (again, for myself). On the other hand, if the tension is too high, my smash and clear will become less powerful (in addition, I need to hit harder in such a case).
I don't think I'm qualify to conclude anything, but I personally think that the best string tension (i.e. the tension which generate the optimal balance of power and control) for different people vary. I've asked the same question to one of the ex-member of HK team, and he said that people at beginner/intermediate level should use tension at 20 to 21 lbs, too high tension will result at poor control and less power (the racquet is just like a rock). For advanced level players like him, they usually use string tension at ~28 lbs, and he said that this can give them more powerful smash. He further explained that someone can only take the advantages of higher tension if he/she has more powerful wrist.
Finally, please don't laugh at me if what I said doesn't make sense to you. -
O
OJ
Guest
RE: Effect of string tension
The string tension discussion is undoubtly an interesting one, and there´s no reason to flame eachother. The fact that there seems to be many different scientific conclussions show that there is probably no easy answer. My experience of science is that when you get many answers you have not counted in all the facts. Maby this is the case here. In the science you often isolate the facts to get clear answers, and if you for instance look only at the material you get a clear answer about that, but if you add another factor lets say the technic used when hitting the shuttle, the answer is maby another.
Since I have been playing for about 15 years now I have made my personal pseudo science on the topic. I know how I whant my racket to feel when I hit the shuttle. When my racket is correctly (for me) strung I know how hard I need to hit each stroke. It also give a sound that I recogninice (although that sond had differed over the years depending on my material). But this is all about finding the right feel for the sweet spot not so much about power and control.
As for the articles reffered to by Magnus (interesting reading, thanks Mag) I kind of recognice in real life, the theory that there is a tension span where you get a good result and a proper feel. As for the power I´m not sure what´s correct. I can´t really tell if the shuttle leaves my racket at a higher speed if I string it at a certain tension. I´d say that the differance is little, but my impression is that higher tension gives slightly more power. That impression however could be wrong. What I can tell is that the risk of missing the sweet spot is higer at a higher tensions, and if that happens the speed of the shuttle of course is a lot lower. I belive it´s more important to hit the sweet spot every time than have a posibility of a more powerful shoot when you hit correctly.
Since this topic was firts issued by a person new to badminton I´d sugest that he didn´t string his racket to hard in the beginning. It´s more likely that he gets good power if he hits the sweet spot correctly, and that could take a while since he is a tennisplayer. The techniqe and timeing is probably more important than string tension and racket model at this point. But I think all this can bee conclueded from former postings.
The string tension discussion is undoubtly an interesting one, and there´s no reason to flame eachother. The fact that there seems to be many different scientific conclussions show that there is probably no easy answer. My experience of science is that when you get many answers you have not counted in all the facts. Maby this is the case here. In the science you often isolate the facts to get clear answers, and if you for instance look only at the material you get a clear answer about that, but if you add another factor lets say the technic used when hitting the shuttle, the answer is maby another.
Since I have been playing for about 15 years now I have made my personal pseudo science on the topic. I know how I whant my racket to feel when I hit the shuttle. When my racket is correctly (for me) strung I know how hard I need to hit each stroke. It also give a sound that I recogninice (although that sond had differed over the years depending on my material). But this is all about finding the right feel for the sweet spot not so much about power and control.
As for the articles reffered to by Magnus (interesting reading, thanks Mag) I kind of recognice in real life, the theory that there is a tension span where you get a good result and a proper feel. As for the power I´m not sure what´s correct. I can´t really tell if the shuttle leaves my racket at a higher speed if I string it at a certain tension. I´d say that the differance is little, but my impression is that higher tension gives slightly more power. That impression however could be wrong. What I can tell is that the risk of missing the sweet spot is higer at a higher tensions, and if that happens the speed of the shuttle of course is a lot lower. I belive it´s more important to hit the sweet spot every time than have a posibility of a more powerful shoot when you hit correctly.
Since this topic was firts issued by a person new to badminton I´d sugest that he didn´t string his racket to hard in the beginning. It´s more likely that he gets good power if he hits the sweet spot correctly, and that could take a while since he is a tennisplayer. The techniqe and timeing is probably more important than string tension and racket model at this point. But I think all this can bee conclueded from former postings.
here is my theory.
Brett,
you are correct that the trampoline effect propels the shuttle. i have an extension to your theory. this extension explains why some people feels that tighter strings give more power.
the trampoline effect is correct, but i think that also depends on how hard you are hitting. in simpler terms: if you hit hard, you need a tighter trampoline, if you don't hit as hard, you need a softer trampoline.
here is my explanation. hitting hard mean faster racket speed. if string tension is low, the trampline needs to deform and then rebound. and there's not enough time for that thus power is lost. also, since there will be a larger deformation of the strings, the projectile will be less predictable thus poorer control at the same time.
on the other hand, if the string is tight, the trampoline rebound much faster with less deformation, as a result, better power and better control. the requirement is that the player must hit hard, if the player doesn't hit hard, then he cannot take advantage of the tigher trampoline and the racket feels dead.
there has been studies done on string tension vs rebound speed. in these experiments, heavy metal balls are dropped onto a stationary racket. unfortunately, the experiment fails to capture the "speed" of the racket swing since the ball is always dropped from the same height for all string tensions.
cheers,
kwun
Brett,
you are correct that the trampoline effect propels the shuttle. i have an extension to your theory. this extension explains why some people feels that tighter strings give more power.
the trampoline effect is correct, but i think that also depends on how hard you are hitting. in simpler terms: if you hit hard, you need a tighter trampoline, if you don't hit as hard, you need a softer trampoline.
here is my explanation. hitting hard mean faster racket speed. if string tension is low, the trampline needs to deform and then rebound. and there's not enough time for that thus power is lost. also, since there will be a larger deformation of the strings, the projectile will be less predictable thus poorer control at the same time.
on the other hand, if the string is tight, the trampoline rebound much faster with less deformation, as a result, better power and better control. the requirement is that the player must hit hard, if the player doesn't hit hard, then he cannot take advantage of the tigher trampoline and the racket feels dead.
there has been studies done on string tension vs rebound speed. in these experiments, heavy metal balls are dropped onto a stationary racket. unfortunately, the experiment fails to capture the "speed" of the racket swing since the ball is always dropped from the same height for all string tensions.
cheers,
kwun
V
vince poon
Guest
RE: here is my theory.
I agreed, the proper string tension is relative to the player. You guys are all right, higher tension does give more power but so does lower tension. I think you could use a bell curve on the graph to show the relationship between string tension and power, the y-axis (vertical?)is the power and the x-axis is string tension. Let say you start the string tension at 10lbs, the increase of tension definitely will increase power but once you pass the top of the bell curve, you get diminish return as you increase the tension. Of course everybody has different bell curve, the type of bell curve is relative to your racquet skill. For my racquet skill, the best tension for me is between 22-24lbs but for Taufik Hidayat is probably between 27-32lbs (just a guess).
I agreed, the proper string tension is relative to the player. You guys are all right, higher tension does give more power but so does lower tension. I think you could use a bell curve on the graph to show the relationship between string tension and power, the y-axis (vertical?)is the power and the x-axis is string tension. Let say you start the string tension at 10lbs, the increase of tension definitely will increase power but once you pass the top of the bell curve, you get diminish return as you increase the tension. Of course everybody has different bell curve, the type of bell curve is relative to your racquet skill. For my racquet skill, the best tension for me is between 22-24lbs but for Taufik Hidayat is probably between 27-32lbs (just a guess).
Byro-Nenium
Regular Member
I've never even considered buying the MP100, it costs more than $300 Singapore dollars. It makes the Ti-10 cheap.......
RE: here is my theory.
Kwun, that makes sense to me. There are clearly a lot of factors involved with generating a powerful shot and obviously what works with one player may not work for the next.
This reminds me of a story about the long-hitting golfer John Daly. He was at a practice range hitting buckets of balls, but kept slicing them, claiming the shaft on his driver wasn't stiff enough. His manufacturer had an equipment truck at the range so he took his driver to them and had them put on an experimental XXXXS shaft. Daly returned to the range and started pounding balls over the tops of large trees 300 yards aways with the modified driver. Another pro (a big, long hitting player) tried out the driver with the new shaft, could only hit some weak slices with the driver and announced that Daly was the only player on tour strong enough to hit with that shaft.
Kwun, that makes sense to me. There are clearly a lot of factors involved with generating a powerful shot and obviously what works with one player may not work for the next.
This reminds me of a story about the long-hitting golfer John Daly. He was at a practice range hitting buckets of balls, but kept slicing them, claiming the shaft on his driver wasn't stiff enough. His manufacturer had an equipment truck at the range so he took his driver to them and had them put on an experimental XXXXS shaft. Daly returned to the range and started pounding balls over the tops of large trees 300 yards aways with the modified driver. Another pro (a big, long hitting player) tried out the driver with the new shaft, could only hit some weak slices with the driver and announced that Daly was the only player on tour strong enough to hit with that shaft.
G
grrr
Guest
IT's NOT lighter.
There is such an interesting discussion on strings tension. Following is what I have learned and never been able to prove anything. Higher/lower string tension gives you more power is true depending with how much force you are able to transfer to the shuttle. Strings also have elasticity (things that researchers can see through high speed cameras) and when contacting the shuttle it deforms and propel the shuttle. If string tension relationship hitting power/elasticity has to match: say a player with hitting/transfer power rated at 20 lbs using a racquet strung at 30 lbs, he/she is not able to make the strings go fully back to propel the shuttle and hence he feels there is a power loss. Same thing goes to a player that can hit at 30 lbs with a racquet strung at 20 lbs. Here the case is that the string did not go as far back as the corresponding 30 lbs power transferred to the shuttle, therefore the shuttle will not travel as fast as it could. I'm not sure if this is understandable due to my 'good' English.
At the end my teacher used an analogy from a Robin Hood movie. There was a flag pole with a metal flag on top of a castle and not a single archer could shoot an arrow that would reach the flag. There's was a bow but it was to tigh for anybody to use it. Robin Hood pick up the bow and he was strong enough to flex the bow and shoot the arrow to the top of the castle.
I only learned this theory in my classes which according to my teacher were results they studied from high speed cameras. Who am I to discuss with them about these things? After all what I am really interested is playing badminton and my racquet feels good!!
At the end my teacher used an analogy from a Robin Hood movie. There was a flag pole with a metal flag on top of a castle and not a single archer could shoot an arrow that would reach the flag. There's was a bow but it was to tigh for anybody to use it. Robin Hood pick up the bow and he was strong enough to flex the bow and shoot the arrow to the top of the castle.
I only learned this theory in my classes which according to my teacher were results they studied from high speed cameras. Who am I to discuss with them about these things? After all what I am really interested is playing badminton and my racquet feels good!!
C
Caveman
Guest
Well if u r playing singles then a slightly heavy head racquet will do u fine especially in the backline clearings and smashes. In addition, the heavy head will oso contribute to the power (remember the weight factor in the law of Force?) thus enable us to ve a higher optimise string tension which as a result induces oso better control. My recommendation is Ti 10 n the tension ranges from 23 to 26Ibs to intermediate player.
But if u r playing doubles then the optimise power would then be the power one can execute usually in a split of a second. Since doubles games r very fast at higher level thus it would be pointless to use heavy head racquet as its hard to maximise e racquet's power and secondly it will ve low manoeuvrability. Well if u r strong n fast enough otherwise dun think about it unless ur partner wants to 'watch rather than play' a game with u, hehe.
A well balance racquet is e advice.
But if u r playing doubles then the optimise power would then be the power one can execute usually in a split of a second. Since doubles games r very fast at higher level thus it would be pointless to use heavy head racquet as its hard to maximise e racquet's power and secondly it will ve low manoeuvrability. Well if u r strong n fast enough otherwise dun think about it unless ur partner wants to 'watch rather than play' a game with u, hehe.
A well balance racquet is e advice.