good observation but wrong conclusion. Reason being is that yonex have way way more models of iso to choose from to fit your game versus a few cab available these day, plus what cab available for sales have generally similar flex/balance characteric, ie not much choice. Ex: cab 20,21,23,25,30 are more or less, balanced weight, not much difference in stiffness either. If yonex make cab equivalent of AT and NS series, i'm sure cab can give u the power like the AT and NS too. hmmm, how about cab 800 DE/OF cab 900 T/P cab 9000 S/X
Cooler reveals cab advantages Not 100% correct, more like >50% incorrect Look at today's tension range, many (even casual players) are now using 25 lb+ (some even 30+) on their new MP, NS and AT to make up for the iso's lack of explosiveness. This high tenison in turn reduces the sweet spot (SP)size to no bigger than a cab strung at 22-25lbs, same string. Result is yonex has to use exotic material to handle the higher tension on isometric frame. With cabs, cost to make is lower because one dont need exotic material/design to take up extreme high tension frame. Secondly, oval shape by nature will alway be stronger than iso shape frame, everything else being equal. Thirdly, by design and physics, iso frames do have larger sweetspot than cab strung at same tension but iso's SP is located 'lower' than an oval frame. This means when shuttlecock is struck at the SP, the angular velocity is LOWER off an racket than a cab, everything else is held constant. Point #3 partly explains why shuttles coming off a cab feels more 'faster'. I think the pros use iso because they have to. 1. sponsorship 2. discontinued supply of some cabs If u ask tony G, his favorite is still the cab22. For pros, stiffness and balance of a racket are more important factors to them. Tony had to switch to next stfifiest racket at that time, which is the mp100 and not switch to other available cabs at that time.(cab 20/21)
I've been playing a lot with the CAB30MS 2U strung with MicroLegend at 23 lbs. The power is so addicting!
Didn't the vancouver gangs tell you how lousy my playing skill is??? Anyway, I am pretty sure I can revenge on the dinner table though.
Guess math wasn't your major Of course there are other factors than head-shape that ALSO affects sweet spot size. Not only stringing tenstion for that matter, also string pattern, inserts, weighting, shape of the frame (box shape vs aero-shape etc..) But I was referencing the cab/oval vs. iso head shape.. which was what this post was all about Correct (I still don't see what you refer to as incorrect in my post).. This is like "Your post is incorrect, becuase pinnoccio has a wooden d*ck " I am not familier with the term SP.. Do you mean sweetspot?? But the larger sweetspot of a ISO would in effect mean that you can hit the shuttle at a higher point and still be within the sweetspot (given all other factors equal). Yonex writes: "In year 1992, YONEX developed the world's first epoch-making technology in badminton ...the "ISOMETRIC Square Head Shape". This YONEX development continues to sets the pace of winning play. The Isometric Square Head Shape badminton racquet design provides a 32 percent larger effective hitting area than a conventional badminton racquet. Also, unlike a conventional badminton racquet with main and cross strings of varying length, the Isometric Square Head Shape equalizes the length of main cross strings in the stringbed-enlarging the sweetspot all-around for more consistent shot accuracy even on off-centre hits." Also a picture (at the end) from Yonex for reference: I don't buy that Yonex would be forcing the pro's to use ISO if they all preffered cab-shape... I am pretty sure that if por's felt strongly about it they would influence Yonex to have pro-models with classic head shape.. After all Yonex want their pro's to be happy and win lots of titles against non yonex sponsored players.. /T
quite possibly! maybe they'll make those series next time around! until then I'll choose my racquets based on stiffness
Perhaps you can try to test the native flex of an unstrung oval versus an unstrung iso. They are different, and maybe this is one reason. An iso frame is stiffer and squarer, which is good against frame twist for off-center hits, but it is not as dynamically alive in its flex as an oval. Also it is more difficult to string a 100% distortionless oval racquet than an iso. But if you get it close it can be dynamite.
You are so incorrect. You seem to have same success as cooldoo6, that is, to able to draw conclusion opposite to the real truth or science. Reality is, oval shape frame resist distortion better than iso frame rackets, all else being equal (ie same material, same cross sectional shape and thickness, etc). I was gonna prove to u mathematically but it could be long and grueling. So i take it from nature itself which we all can relate to. It seem in nature, the protective shells from all bird eggs are OVAL shape. The reason distortion seem larger from cabs is because it is harder for our eyes to distinguish distortion on a iso shape object. For me, i see distorted iso frame racket all the time from other stringers. Secondly, yonex cabs design is unchanged for decades. If u put a cab 20/21/25 side by side with any high end iso models, u will see AT, NS, MP frames are thicker/wider. Yonex cab frames never benefited from applicaton of UHMG carbon fiber, titanium, or nano technology. That is why a cab20 would distort more than current crops of new iso rackets. It has nothing do with weak oval shape frame. As a racket designer like yourselfr, i'm surprised u don't understand the basic stress and strain of basic geometry shaped objects. In order to increase sweet spot area, iso shape is better but it come at a cost, less strength. In nature, nothing come for free.
Cooler, have you tried testing the flex of an unstrung oval versus an unstrung iso? Also, do you use the stringing quality qc check (standing the racquet against a wall or bookshelve and drawing a trace on the top) for before and after check? Both iso and oval distort at very high tension but ovals seem to "shrink" in length more easily than isos and isos seem to lengthen more so than ovals.
Guys, when you say distortion, what are the racket frames distorted from? Are you talking about shapes?
i beg to differ on that point. let me explain using an old diagram that i made a few years ago: this diagram illustrates that more force is actually exerted at the 2/4/8/10 o'clock positions of the racket frame than on the 12/3/9/6 o'clock position, this can be deduced with simple static force analysis. now, given the shape of the oval vs. iso frame, you can see that the oval is relatively flat at the 2/10 o'clock while the iso frame is more arched in shape. now we all know from the Roman's time that an arch can hold more force and resist deforming. the iso frame happens to be more arch shaped than the oval shape at the most stressed point of the racket, so as a result, i believe that the iso frame can resist distortion better than oval. this is of course, talking about local distortion at the 2/10 o'clock position. i am not making any other distortion claims. and i have seen oval rackets strung in high tension (30lbs) by reputable stringers, and they all shows that the 2/10 o'clock position are drawn in by the high tension. that observation aligns with my claim.
twobeer, i guess i had inadvertently overstated your incorrectness I was mostly keying on your last part of your post: that cabs are novelty. I took that as meaning inferior which it isn't. The isometric design is greatly influenced by the consumers. Iso frame is more visibly appealing than oval because oval shape seem to reflect old fashion and inferior. This can be seen in car design too. That is why yonex steer all their marketing and design dollars toward the iso rackets. If yonex put same amount of improvement into cabs, cab racket can be just as good or even better than iso. I think yonex claim or 32% more sweet spot (SP) area on iso shape frame is over stated. Since not all iso frame series have similar stringbed area, that claim of 32% more SP is bogus. If u overlay a yonex cab over a MP100 or 99, the MP frame has only tiny bit more area (near 11 and 1 oclock). This small amount can not improve SP by 32%. Secondly, the boundary between SP and not SP area is not black and white, it is gradual. Since yonex didnt specify what degree of repulsion performance on the stringbed is excellent and considered SP, comparing SP of cab vs iso can be 'distorted' by the seller for marketing purposes.
The strength of the oval frame is that its flex and rebound, from a power shot on a racquet strung with very high tension, is more uniform and faster than an iso. This gives that feeling of more "punch". Actually good stringing practices will eliminate that distorting inward pull at the 10 and 2 o'clock on an oval.
so, r u saying a perfect oval string job would reduce distortion (yes) and therefore reducing flexing and reduce feeling of more 'punch'?
No, it is the other way around. If your racquet is distorted from stringing it is like having your arms and legs tied up.
I still dont buy your claim. On a distorted racket, i would be more worrying about cracking my racket from mishitting or light clashes, not worrying about whether i gain or lose 1-2% punchiness from the stringbed. I bet i can have more punchiness from a highly distorted cab20 strung with bg66 than an undistorted cab 20 strung with a thick string, same tension.
Actually on the issue of distortion of CABs, from my experience of my CAB30, I didn't feel much difference in 'punchiness' when it was strung distorted compared to when it was strung correctly. (Stock strings were strung distorted at first) I think the sweet spot was actually enlarged a bit when my CAB was distorted. But that's just my perception. On the topic subject, however, I have not found a CAB that I wasn't satisfied with. I've played with CAB 30MS, 20 Tour Special, 20MS, 21, 23, and as Kwun has said before, I feel this 'pop' that I don't feel in ISO rackets. Nailing the sweet spot on a CAB for me seems to generate a much greater sound than an ISO as well. So far, I've got to say, I'm in love with my CAB 30MS. It's stability and control is greater than my 'now-broken' AT800OF when I hit the sweet spot.
