Tag: Bonny

Badminton Racket Bonny CLASSIC CARBON Liang Jian Reviews
A friend once mentioned that Pollen holds over 40 patented frame designs, showcasing the company’s strong research and development background. This gives them a significant edge over many domestic brands. However, in terms of high-end products, the standout models currently are the J20 aerodynamic frame, the 1982 box frame, the 2013 eight-sided aerodynamic frame, and the Infiniti small frame. These successful models have survived the market’s competitive selection process and are widely recognized, but I’ve grown tired of them.
Recently, Pollen has introduced some other notable frame designs, but I felt a bit uneasy upon hearing the name of this new racket. Such a blatant approach seems like a red flag, and it shouldn’t be overlooked. However, according to relevant sources, this frame is indeed newly developed. Given the skepticism surrounding Pollen’s promotional tactics, I hope the brand takes care to avoid potential issues.
Parameters: 4UG5, with a base, total weight 90.91g, balance point 297mm, 6.5mm shaft, made from 46T material, 222mm in length, with medium to high stiffness. The aerodynamic frame has a 72-hole string bed, 9-3 point string grooves, warranty of 30 pounds, strung at 25-27 lbs with VBS66N.
Returning to this new product, the color scheme follows Pollen’s “classic” style, featuring a glossy black finish with high-gloss stickers, making the frame look very sleek. The red and blue stickers spiral around the wings in a double helix pattern, with a color-changing effect. I find this texture appealing, as it resonates with my background. The font with its changing effect reminds me of the FC red and white gaming console—does it evoke memories of the original Castlevania?
Honestly, the sensation while swinging the racket is quite familiar, with the whooshing sound during cuts through the air bringing back many memories.
During warm-ups, it showed a slight head-heavy feel, allowing for good leverage, and the 72-hole string bed provides a sufficiently large sweet spot, making it easy to adapt compared to other Pollen speed rackets. However, after hitting a few high clears, I noticed something—this new model has extremely high elasticity! This elasticity is clearly a result of Pollen’s latest integration of boron fiber in the ultra-thin shaft.
Indeed, as indicated in the promotional material, the racket features a small flat head design, which can explain the slight explosive feel when hitting the sweet spot. Given its intended role as an offensive racket, I feel the 4U weight might be a bit insufficient; I’d recommend a 3U version for those capable. Yet, even at 4U, the racket’s responsiveness due to its highly elastic shaft and frame provides a unique power. The quick and surprising shot response is commendable. I initially intended to challenge the recent trend of prioritizing elasticity in rackets, but after using this one, I found myself at a loss for words. It delivers a powerful and thrilling feedback for every focused shot, effectively addressing any doubts I had. However, if it were up to me, I would suggest shortening the shaft by 5mm without considering the difficulty of handling.
Its swing speed is indeed fast, especially during the pulling phase, showcasing a sharp performance without feeling hindered by the head-heavy balance. The stiff shaft ensures rapid response and crisp shots, with no delay during consecutive swings, and the quick recovery of the shaft instills confidence against faster opponents.
This frame design is typically prone to torsional instability, especially with Pollen pairing it with a 6.5mm shaft, which even leading brands hesitate to implement on flagship speed rackets. However, Pollen has gone “all out” this time—maintaining high overall rigidity ensures sufficient stability, and the shot directionality and stability reach an impressive level. Just be careful not to swing it at anyone…
That said, the high stiffness of the frame makes delicate net play more challenging, requiring precise control of power and angle; otherwise, shots can easily go too high. While the “lifting” motion still effectively suppresses height, getting used to the feel for angled shots takes longer. The racket produces a strong rebound sensation for backcourt lifts; the “wrap” feeling is somewhat lacking, but the “cut” response is quick, resulting in higher quality for slices and redirects compared to straight lifts.
Having used many Pollen rackets, including the Smash series box frame, the God of War series aerodynamic frame, the Bow and Sword series trapezoidal frame, the Princess series 72-hole hybrid frame, the Extreme Phoenix series ultra-thin frame, and the Little Cannon series 88-hole thin-wing frame, I can say that the 72-hole small flat head diamond aerodynamic frame follows a similar approach, making its originality debatable.
However, from a performance perspective, “Liang Jian” stands solid. In terms of swing speed, this new product likely surpasses all other rackets of the same specifications and balance point, which is remarkable. It clearly demonstrates that it is not merely a product of imitation and assembly; producing such performance requires substantial effort.
Before encountering this product, I shared the same doubts as many players: why release a similarly capable frame when Pollen already has a mature aerodynamic design? I suppose this “Liang Jian” is meant to stand out amidst controversy. What astonishes me is that it may well perform better than any other “Liang Jian” I’ve used…
September 20, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny J20-008 Reviews
When it comes to Pollen, one cannot overlook its core competitive product—the “Wu Que” series. The unique woven frame structure and the clear carbon fiber texture wrapped in distinctive resin showcase a strong industrial style, making it stand out.
Of course, in today’s diverse opinions, many players have become immune to the hard hitting feel of the Wu Que series, losing that initial freshness. However, it must be acknowledged that the Wu Que series has always been Pollen’s flagship product.
This time, I want to share my experience with the Pollen Wu Que J20-008, which attracted me deeply with its appearance. It retains the familiar woven design, but instead of the dull cement gray or the series’ signature bright silver, the 008 boldly uses a striking ice blue in an asymmetric form on the 4 and 10 o’clock positions of the frame.
The J20-008, weighing 4U and having a balance point of 300±5mm, features moderate shaft elasticity. The frame has a large head square design with 76 string holes.
With its sharp, streamlined aerodynamic frame structure and an overall weight of 4U, the 008 boasts a high balance point of 303mm (after applying the grip), yet maintains a fast swing speed.
As the frame transitions to the bottom, the rounded and stable fluid aerodynamic structure enhances its anti-torsion properties in the T-joint area, making it a reasonable choice.
In actual gameplay, the 008 makes it easy to hit high clear shots thanks to its forward balance point. Coupled with the direct and crisp mid-shaft feedback characteristic of the Wu Que series, the feeling is as if the shuttlecock is “hit and gone” without any lingering, but players familiar with the Wu Que series won’t be satisfied with just this straightforward feel, as it’s merely the basic performance of the series. Strung at 28lbs with VBS66N, the 008 delivers significantly enhanced sound upon impact, with a metallic resonance!
Powerful and dynamic. High stiffness is undoubtedly the 008’s most proud attribute. Whether it’s a fast flat block at the net or a push and release, the 008 offers excellent directionality and continuity.
When holding the racket level and targeting the net tape, I can distinctly feel the friction and vibration when the shuttle makes contact with the string bed during small movements like soft shots. The stable frame ensures the 008’s shot directionality is quite precise. Pairing it with a rougher string can enhance its frictional properties, adding more spin to net shots.
In mid-court exchanges, the light weight and swing weight of the 008 balance its dynamic shot-making capabilities, allowing for considerable variation. The overall cross-section of the frame shows excellent torsional stability. Although the shot-wrapping and hold time are brief, the speed and placement are crisp, akin to hitting metal.
However, with benefits come trade-offs; the advantage in speed means sacrificing much of its absolute offensive capability. When executing heavy smashes with the 008, the feedback can be quite firm, requiring solid technique to effectively leverage its attacking potential. Therefore, I recommend players use the 008 to focus on quick continuity and rhythm during aggressive play.
The large head design of the 008 not only allows for quick offensive strikes but also performs well defensively, thanks to its rapid rebound speed and high margin for error. During defensive counterattacks, it delivers a sharp, forceful response, with the mid-shaft rebounding quickly and stably, maintaining good control over shot trajectories. However, its strong frame rigidity means that during fast-paced doubles play, hitting off the sweet spot will noticeably lower shot quality, illustrating the pros and cons of its stiffness in both offense and defense. Passive defensive responses require more patience to adapt.
—Recommendation Summary Pollen, known for its “cost-performance ratio,” has produced many excellent works within its core Wu Que series. However, it’s rare to see something as “novel” as the 008, which stands out for its distinctive appearance and feel. Its dynamic yet sturdy hitting attributes avoid the common pitfalls, and the moderate shaft elasticity provides a nice balance amidst the stiffness. However, its lack of a wrapping feel may not suit players who prefer finesse. I recommend this racket for singles players who favor speed and can also handle fast-paced doubles. It’s best paired with a rigid VBS-66N or an elastic VBS-63. The performance of the J20-008 will certainly not disappoint you.
September 20, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny STAR MAGIC Reviews
A friend said this is the most beautiful “Sky Realm” racket.
If we’re simply talking about aesthetics, it’s certainly reasonable to buy an attractive racket in the 200 range. However, since we’re at Zhongyu, it’s clear that a racket that looks good and performs well is even better, and there are plenty of pretty options in this price range.
In the previous two articles, I’ve already established the differences between the Star Shadow and Star Cloud. For the final model, Star Fantasy, I’m fortunate to be able to test it out during a phase of warming-up feel. This is the conclusion of the parallel testing series; thank you all for your support.
Specs: 4UG5, pre-strung with a total weight of 93.1g, balance point of 285mm, shaft length of 220mm, soft tuning, fluid box frame, 76-hole string bed, 9-3 o’clock string grooves, fluid box frame, a tension guarantee of 26lbs, strung at 24-26lbs with VBS66N strings. From the flower pattern to gray-purple, and now to the bright blue, Bo Li finally knows how to create a paint job that captures trendy aesthetics. The bright blue of Star Fantasy easily reminds me of the Rapid 90F, but some friends have previously mentioned that the matte finish results in a less upscale appearance, which is a minor regret. The patterns on both sides of the frame have also changed to stars and planets, maintaining a fresh look that even has a slightly childish vibe—this is not a criticism; it’s just that for students, it might feel a bit juvenile, while for working professionals, it’s just right. I’ve gotten older, so it’s time for my gear to have a more mature look, and Star Fantasy fits the bill nicely.
Although the weights and balance points of the three rackets differ, if you don’t analyze them closely, they feel quite similar in terms of heft; they all lean toward balanced but aren’t overly light. The sensation of using leverage during various types of strikes is more pronounced and resembles that of the Star Shadow. Other than that, the swing weight and speed are quite similar, and when trying to discern the subtle differences among the three, I ultimately gave up. Since it’s hard to distinguish them deliberately, their differences in regular use probably won’t impact the ease of handling significantly, making the distinction somewhat limited.
In this context, it’s better to discuss the differences in racket tuning in a competitive setting. Regarding the feedback received from hitting, the pleasure I get from the Star Fantasy surpasses that of the Star Shadow. Although all three rackets use basic materials, the tactile experience differs significantly; the Star Shadow feels the most muted, while Star Fantasy is in the middle. From what I understand, the Star Shadow is priced slightly lower, and I can see the precision behind NVIDIA’s founder’s decisions.
When switching from Star Cloud to Star Fantasy, I noticed that the latter’s attacks aren’t as solid as the former’s. This is reflected in a slightly greater angle deviation in shots and lower output at the moment of contact. One could say that while using the Star Fantasy in multiple matches, it feels more unpredictable. In the same active downstroke situations, the Star Fantasy feels softer and lacks a bit of concentrated explosive power. This means that each downstroke with the Star Fantasy is easier for opponents to defend against, necessitating more shot continuity to score, even when you have the upper hand.
However, the Star Fantasy seems to endure more. Even when playing rigorously for three or four games, using the “syrupy” Star Cloud would leave me physically drained, while switching to the slightly softer Star Fantasy allows me to keep going for three more games. If the Star Cloud has a killer move, the Star Fantasy has its own elusive step, making it better for drop shots. Other than that, there aren’t significant differences in controlling small balls or flat shots among the three rackets.
After trying all three, I do have my preferences based on their different performance characteristics. However, I believe these differences aren’t that important for beginners; it’s better for them to choose based on aesthetic appeal. For intermediate players, these rackets also make great recommendations for new players or as gifts; I’m sure they’ll be favored by female players.
September 20, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny FEATHER 280 Reviews
How to handle leftover rice? I usually fry it. On the surface, it’s just reheating cold leftovers from the day before, simply to fill the stomach. However, when you add fresh shrimp, crisp peas, prized ham, soaked dried scallops, and seasonal vegetables, it transforms into a gourmet meal.
The pinnacle of fried rice can attract everyone. And when it comes to this, the master of fried rice is none other than Capcom.
Yesterday, I learned something that surprised me: the first company to introduce ultra-light rackets (under 5U) to the market was Bonny. Having already played with three of their Light Feather rackets, the latest in the series, the 280, has recently been re-released. That’s right, it’s a re-release, which makes me want to test Bo Li’s “fried rice” skills.
Specs: 5UG5, pre-strung with a total weight of 88.0g, a balance point of 305mm, shaft length of 220mm, medium stiffness, box frame, 76-hole string bed, 8-4 o’clock string grooves, a tension guarantee of 26lbs, strung at 25-27lbs with KT65 strings. You might remember my complaints about the 260, but after trying the 280, they’ve been completely resolved.
The platinum black color scheme gives off a high-end Bo Li vibe, although it doesn’t break any aesthetic boundaries. The glossy paintwork is smooth, with gold foil stickers used for the lettering and some frame decorations, which are raised to the touch, making me wonder about their durability against wear.
I initially thought the frame would have the same aerodynamic design as previous models in the series, but it’s gone back to a box frame, which surprised me. Though the Light Feather series has always emphasized lightness and elasticity, this time Bo Li raised the balance point while discarding the aerodynamic frame, clearly indicating a holistic approach to balancing easy handling with stable shot output.
Although Bo Li excels at controlling the dry weight of its rackets, the Light Feather series does not use Ultra Carbon, so the finished product can have a ±3g weight variation, meaning you could end up with a rare 4U racket. In practice, the Light Feather’s swing feels similar to some balanced 4U rackets, and it shouldn’t create a high barrier to using the 280. The easy drive sensation remains consistent—effortless clears to the baseline are incredibly satisfying. Plus, with the frame design changes, shot stability and precision have improved. When I tested controlling the shot’s landing between the two baselines, there was still a bit of the 5U floatiness, but for a racket in this weight class, it performs quite well.
If you focus your power more precisely, it can also produce fast and flat drives, similar to the effect of using the K600, though the hitting feedback and shock absorption on the Light Feather are superior.
I believe the shaft of the 280 hasn’t changed much, being limited by the cost and performance expectations of this product line. There’s no need to further tweak the already highly elastic shaft that performs well in its current form. However, the raised balance point is noticeable when it comes to the smash experience. From Light Feather 68 to 153 to 260 and now to 280, the smashing power has gradually increased, along with the thrill and confidence of heavy smashes. In this version, I can even feel a bit of the head-heavy attack racket’s direct feedback when whipping the shuttle. Though the shot is not suddenly more explosive, the shuttle speed is faster, and the sound is notably louder. After enhancing the downstroke’s threat with various techniques, the 280’s intense attack consistency becomes a greater test for your opponent once you outlast their initial defenses.
The only issue is that in singles, you still need to create your own opportunities for rear-court smashes, and the 280’s shots are still a bit floaty in the net game, so it’s better suited to doubles, where its strengths can shine when you’re in control.
It’s not just about continuous offense; the 280 excels in defense too. When defending against smashes, with just a quick squeeze of the fingers, you can lift the shuttle to the rear court. You can repeatedly defend smashes without much effort. Even if your underarm is targeted, taking a half-step back on your dominant side can awkwardly return the shuttle close to the net. Your backhand and overhead defense are even stronger. Even if your opponent pushes you deep into the backcourt on the forehand side, a cross-court lift to the baseline is still possible. However, the 280’s flat drives could be crisper; I wonder if Bo Li plans to release a new version with a stiffer shaft?
The key point is that with the 280, you can maintain a consistent pace throughout the entire evening without worrying about fatigue in the later stages of play. As Captain America would say, “I can do this all day.” This impressive endurance comes from its low weight, low swing weight, and energy-saving elasticity. It’s perfect for casual play but also equips the Light Feather with the ability to wear down opponents through endurance tactics. Against players of similar skill, continuous pressure and movement lead to a satisfying victory.
September 20, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny Classic Carbon 2013P II Reviews
First, let me introduce myself. I’m an informal player who first got into badminton in 2013, during my first year of university. I’ve spent a lot of time on outdoor courts, but after pursuing my master’s and PhD, I don’t play as much, averaging around three times a week. My style leans towards speed and sudden attacks, and I’d rate myself around level 4, haha.
I’ve tried some independent brands and also played with the big three, thanks to having friends who let me test their rackets. I’m not too eager about buying high-end rackets (probably because of my budget, haha), but the collection of random rackets I own could already match the price of some high-end ones. When it comes to testing rackets, it might be that I haven’t found one that perfectly fits my style, or maybe I’m not an extreme enthusiast. I’ve often spent entire afternoons playing with friends and coaches using a gifted XM25 racket from a previous promotion. So, the following review is just my personal opinion—everyone has their own preferences, and I encourage open discussion.
Currently, my main rackets are the Third Court Black Panther K Supreme Edition and the Black Panther C Titanium Edition (I’ll review them later). I’ve always wanted to try some second-tier brands, like Kawasaki Lightning, Battle Wolf, Boli’s Demon Blade, and the 2013 and 1982 series, as well as the J20 series. But I admit, I’ve hesitated due to the mixed reviews about Boli’s marketing tactics. Who knows if they’re any good? After a long internal debate and being tempted by PDD’s discounts, I finally ordered the 2013P Second Generation Frost Blue. I got it for 305 yuan, including 66N strings, from a seller on a certain platform. Not sure if the seller remembers me!
Specs: I won’t go into too much detail about the 3-in-1 frame or octagonal edges—you can easily search for that. Considering the tension increase with 80-hole stringing, I asked the seller to string it at 25 lbs.
Appearance: At first, I liked the 2013L Second Generation Purple Gold version, but after showing it to my girlfriend, she felt that both the Frost Blue and Purple Gold were nice, but Frost Blue edged out slightly. From what I’ve read in some threads, I learned a bit about the differences between the P and L versions and ultimately chose the Frost Blue based on my playing style. When it arrived, I found it quite aesthetically pleasing, with a glossy finish that’s both luxurious and understated. It’s not as unattractive as some online forums claim—it just lacks any standout features, haha. I do think a cloud logo would look even better—it would be the ultimate finishing touch!
Feel: As a singles player, I haven’t used it for doubles. After a few high-intensity sessions, playing around sixteen or seventeen 21-point games, I’m not sure if I’ve improved or if it’s just a placebo effect, but my current record is 15 wins and 1 loss. I removed the original grip and added an overgrip, so it’s slightly heavier but still agile. As others have reviewed, this racket is stiff—very stiff from top to bottom, as one reviewer aptly put it, like a “brute.” The downward pressure is excellent, and the shuttle leaves the racket quickly, giving you an irresistible urge to smash whenever you’re under a clear. With proper power and footwork, it’s often possible to score with a single hit. Its precision is excellent—whether attacking or defending, it meets placement needs well, without any floating or imprecise shots. It also performs well in fast drives, making it suitable for players who favor continuous offensive play. Despite being a 3U racket, it’s surprisingly nimble, not inferior to the speed-focused series my friends use.
Cons: I was going to mention its weight and stiffness, as they can be quite taxing on stamina. Against tough opponents, during long rallies, it’s easy to become fatigued, and once your form suffers, the power of this heavy sword drops significantly. However, that’s not the racket’s fault—it’s mine!
Lastly, I want to touch on the topic of second-tier brands and independent brands often being associated with marketing “shills,” especially in the 300–500 yuan price range. There’s a lot of malicious competition and exaggerated claims, but instead of relying on hearsay, I think personal experience is more reliable, especially given the low cost of trying these rackets. At 300 yuan, including stringing, I believe the 2013P Second Generation is undoubtedly a solid and well-made product.
September 20, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny STAR SHADOW Reviews
Playing badminton has become a luxury beyond my reach. Even during work events, my physical condition no longer allows me to accelerate and exert power like before; I struggle more often now. Although it’s not the first time I’ve faced this situation, a friend still recommended to me the Star Shadow, Star Illusion, and Star Cloud.
Specs:
4U G5, with base grip. Total weight: 92.4g in playing condition. Balance point: 283mm. Shaft length: 220mm, flexible shaft. Fluid box-shaped frame, 76-hole string bed, grommets at 9–3 o’clock, tension limit of 26 lbs, strung with 24-26lbs VBS66N.
I know that Babolat’s recent “Sky Series” includes three models, with slight differences in their paint jobs but a consistent overall style. The Star Illusion features a rose gold and cream white color scheme, giving it a warm and cozy feel. There are orange and light green stars and stripes on the frame for decoration. Although simple, the design is harmonious and not overly flashy, emphasizing a refreshing look. Unfortunately, the painting technique isn’t top-notch, as the surface has a rough texture. There’s an old saying: “The pinker the racket, the stronger the smash,” but the “Sky Series” rackets are quite rare in that their appearance lacks any aggressive vibe, making them likely more appealing to players who focus on the joy of badminton itself.
I already knew this was an entry-level racket, but when I first held the Star Shadow, I was still charmed by its lightness. Although it has a box-shaped frame, the thickness of the frame is relatively thin, and the beveled edge design aids airflow, giving this 4U racket impressive swing speed. Unlike those ultra-light rackets with extremely high balance points and very low weight, it still feels like a normal racket. There’s no “flail” feeling while swinging, and although the shaft is soft, it still feels responsive. The lower balance point provides agility without sacrificing a solid, reliable grip. Even female beginners with less power can feel that this is a racket they “can handle.”
After testing many high-end rackets designed for victory on the court, using extreme head-heaviness or swing speed, and employing a lot of calculation and resources to create unique feels, the Star Shadow is simpler, offering a natural feeling with a high level of usability.
Of course, any racket should be tested on the court to see how it performs. The Star Shadow‘s long, flexible shaft makes it easy to generate shaft flex during swings, and in all shots like clears and smashes, you can feel the shaft’s elasticity at work. While the elastic quality doesn’t exceed its price range, the ease of accessing that flex gives players confidence in their tactical moves. The Star Shadow feels like a beginner tutorial in a game, making it easy for both me and beginners to hit clears effortlessly to the backcourt. Only after completing this “beginner village” task and gaining a sense of achievement can you start optimizing your clear strokes. With its easy power, fast swing, and reliable feel, the Star Shadow naturally becomes a great first racket for a beginner.
This performance naturally reminds me of the lower-spec NF600 (aka Bluebird), but the Star Shadow feels a bit more refined, both in appearance and in subjective feel.
However, I can’t avoid discussing its competitive performance. The racket’s elasticity and moderate head heaviness are not outstanding, but the overall tuning of the Star Shadow gives it two key strengths: speed and stability.
The Star Shadow has fast swing speed and perhaps the best shuttle-holding ability I’ve seen in recent entry-level rackets, allowing it to handle slightly faster-paced exchanges.
Speed is easy to understand, but its stability comes from its high forgiveness. I used to attribute increased forgiveness to the string bed and sweet spot size, and while these are indeed strengths of the Star Shadow, its ease of use is also key. With this racket, you don’t need to be overly tense; even if you can’t always find the optimal hitting point, its easy-to-drive nature helps you recover better. In other words, its performance on defensive shots, such as lifting smashes, feels particularly comfortable. This is something I haven’t experienced in the past three to four months of trialing entry-level rackets.
As for the downsides, they are quite obvious: a lack of absolute offensive power and slower response in fast exchanges, especially the former. Its confidence in downward strokes can’t match some classic entry-level choices, but for beginners or players looking to take it easy, this isn’t critical. What’s important is the feeling of power and shuttle feedback on each return, experiencing the pure joy of swinging the racket and hitting the shuttle, or refining your technique and ball control without relying on technological enhancements. It can be both a toy and a tool. For a racket in this category, and for someone like me who can’t currently face the game with a competitive mindset, it’s more than adequate and excellent.
Currently, the racket is priced at 299 RMB. Even if you’re drawn to it for the aesthetics, paying the full price may not feel entirely justified. However, Babolat rackets are typically offered with discounts by certain retailers, and I think it would be a reasonable purchase if you can get it at a price on par with or slightly lower than the HMR.
September 20, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny Tao Yao Zhuo Hua Reviews
What makes lower-end products sell like hotcakes?
Is it the unmatched brand appeal of Green? The vast product line accumulated over time by Blue? The stunning design of Red? Or the unparalleled return-and-exchange service of Yellow?
Without these advantages, second-tier and independent brands are too conservative in their approach, usually relying on lower prices and better materials to compete. In recent years, some manufacturers have started focusing on packaging and presentation, offering thoughtful gifts that make people feel they’re getting good value. This has made their products much more competitive. But soon, these practices were copied, leading to a cycle of competition at the same price range, preventing anyone from truly standing out.
Specifications:
4UG5, no grip tape, 87.0g in use, balance point 292mm, shaft length 218mm, low stiffness, box-type frame, 72-hole string bed, 9-3 o’clock grooves, rated for 26 lbs, strung at 24-26 lbs with Gaosen Steel Armor 5.
Tao Yao and Zhuo Hua from the same series are essentially the same racket, differentiated only by their paint jobs. Both come with a gift box. Zhuo Hua is blue, with a deep blue gift box featuring minimal design elements. The box itself is of good quality, offering decent protection when mailed and also looking nice if given as a gift. However, once opened, the contents are quite minimal, with only a racket cover inside. Although the racket is priced at just under 300 yuan, I’d actually be willing to pay a bit of a premium to get more surprises—grip tape, strings, socks, towels, wristbands—those extra touches would give it a more sincere feel.
Bolly has suffered from poor racket designs in the past but has finally wised up in recent years, paying more attention to the appearance of products across its low, mid, and high-end ranges. Tao Yao and Zhuo Hua feature a blend of traditional Chinese fonts with a fresh design, with white, gray, and blue as the main colors. There’s a gradient transition between gray and white on the shaft and frame, with a few blue lines wrapped around as accents, and subtle patterns on the racket head. Overall, it looks pleasing. At the 2 and 10 o’clock positions, there’s a floral motif that ties into the racket’s theme.
I did my homework—Tao Yao and Zhuo Hua are based on a racket I’ve reviewed before, so I didn’t experience anything particularly new during testing. It fits its positioning as a soft, flexible, lightweight, and easy-to-use racket. That said, I still roped in my team captain at work and forced him to use it in a match.
He was adjusting to the new racket that day, and his performance was quite shaky—which is exactly when a beginner-friendly racket shines. One thing to note: I only handed him the racket right before the match, that’s how confident I was in its ease of use.
True to form, our captain finished the entire match without a single complaint or a frame hit, which speaks volumes about the low entry barrier and high forgiveness of this racket. Playing doubles with him was pretty hassle-free: if he was in the backcourt, I’d just focus on intercepting shots in the middle while he smashed, and if he was in the front, I’d mix smashes and drops, leaving him to finish off the play. Though we’d occasionally bicker over return quality, we both ended up having a pretty relaxed experience by the end of the match.
The string bed isn’t particularly large, but the sweet spot is ample, allowing for a solid shuttle response without feeling too loose. The shaft’s softness is well-suited for beginners, offering easy flex without feeling weak, and the elastic feedback is easy to control.
However, as a captain, his demands go beyond ease of use—he’s particularly fixated on net play and powerful backcourt smashes.
He has an obsession with aggressive net shots when serving and receiving. Initially, I thought he was showing off, but when I saw his low success rate, I realized he was just practicing. Regardless, when using Zhuo Hua, likely frustrated after struggling with the new racket all night, he suddenly burst into form. He didn’t miss a single net shot all match, not even the cross-court flicks or forced low returns. I had my doubts about the feel of this 84g racket, but its sweet spot is indeed impressive.
When it was his turn to deliver power shots, I was surprised he didn’t have a single complaint about the racket. In my opinion, this isn’t a racket that can easily dominate in evenly matched backcourt exchanges, but he wielded it with ease. Two reasons, I think: first, the last match with Zhuo Hua came when everyone’s stamina was flagging, making a racket with a low driving threshold even more crucial to handle the game; second, despite its low balance point and weight, Zhuo Hua offers a surprisingly effective downward pressure, with solid directional control even if the shuttle doesn’t come off explosively. Plus, in the rare case that the backcourt player’s attacks don’t break through, the rotation will naturally bring me to the frontcourt, where I could block potential passes and stabilize the situation until we either scored or lost the point.
One more thing: our captain maintained great consistency throughout the match. The fast, easy handling of Zhuo Hua not only aided his flat drives and backcourt pressure but also reduced fatigue, ensuring longer endurance. Even after long rallies where neither side could break through, we found it easier to recover. In the hot and humid summer of southern China, this endurance is a huge advantage.
After the match, the captain gave Zhuo Hua a thumbs-up. As a reward, I got to borrow his 88S Tour for a while—win-win.
Back to the gift box: while the racket itself doesn’t lack product quality, once you position it as a gift box, it should go beyond just a formality. I’d like to see more accessories inside, at least enough to give when gifting it to a beginner female player—it’s all about saving face.
After B Company and its retailers have made efforts to improve the appearance of their products, they will likely still need to do some work in understanding consumer psychology.

September 20, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny Classic Carbon AtheneⅡ Reviews
The author would like to talk about another series from the Wuqie family—Athena.
The first generation of Athena was truly one of my favorite rackets, even though it wasn’t a popular one. The only thing that didn’t quite sit right with me was that despite being designed as a female-oriented racket, the look still followed the same old exposed carbon fiber under clear lacquer—come on, woven isn’t some sacred ground, what’s so nice about it? The first time it looked fresh, but after seeing it a few more times, it’s just the same old thing.
This time, I got a chance to try out Athena 2, and after using it, I once again felt that refreshing coolness I had during that one summer—a light and fresh product, very fitting for the season.
Specifications: 4UG5, with grip tape and heat shrink, total weight 92.1g in use, balance point 290mm, 6.8mm shaft made of Mitsubishi M40 carbon fiber, 217mm long, medium-soft stiffness, aerodynamic frame, 80-hole string bed, 9-3 o’clock grooves, rated for 30 lbs, strung at 24-26 lbs with VBS66N.
It seems the design team has figured it out—after switching to a white glossy finish, the overall texture of the racket has greatly improved. While the first-generation used a purple-red accent, Athena 2 opted for a mint green, shedding the previous somewhat flamboyant look in favor of something more refreshing. This change might even encourage some male players to give it a try. In fact, looking at the overall design pattern, the two generations share a common design language. The designer seems to have grasped the essence, as the large color patches on both sides of the frame and the scaly texture at 4 and 8 o’clock remain intact.
This is a rare 80-hole racket with a string bed that doesn’t feel dull or shock the hand, and it’s still formed using hot air blow molding. It seems Bolly’s fiber film technology has had a noticeable impact. Softness, high elasticity, and friendliness are the hallmarks of Athena, and I was initially concerned that the second generation might sacrifice some of the first generation’s selling points for better competitive performance, but it turns out I needn’t have worried.
The first impression of Athena 2 felt somewhat similar to Invisible Hand from not long ago—both have a rounded aerodynamic structure, both use white as the base color, and from afar, you might think they’re part of the same series with different color schemes. Even when holding them and weighing their balance and swing weight, it’s hard to tell them apart. Although Athena 2 has an optimized swing weight to appeal to a broader audience, Bolly hasn’t done enough to differentiate the products while maintaining a suitable feel. The real difference only becomes apparent on the court.
After several clears during warm-up, I let out a sigh of relief—it’s still that familiar feel. While warming up with an unfamiliar opponent, rallying back and forth near the baseline, I’m always worried that a mishit or misplacement might expose my lack of basic skills. But Athena is very reliable. As long as you properly execute the full action of raising the racket, rotating your body, and swinging, you don’t even need to apply much force to send the shuttle high and far. The shaft’s elasticity is excellent, its driveability superb, and the frame’s sweet spot is large, with fast head speed—there’s no adaptation required at all.
Interestingly, I recall the first generation having a slight head-heavy feel, but this sensation is reduced in the second generation without affecting the power-absorbing feedback; it’s actually more agile.
Speaking of agility, I have to praise Athena 2‘s improvements in flat drives. The first generation was tuned in a way that avoided the issue of the shaft not recovering properly after continuous swings. In Athena 2, the racket’s tendency to wobble after multiple swings is suppressed, and subjectively it feels like the recovery speed after deformation is faster. While the shuttle response still isn’t particularly crisp, the improved continuity gives more maneuverability in rallies. From what I understand, the second generation has roughly the same specs as the first, but with a slightly stiffer shaft, which does make the racket feel more controllable during high-frequency shots, likely improving its performance in fast-paced exchanges. Unfortunately, the cone cap from the previous generation that I liked didn’t carry over, so when adjusting my grip to generate power, my thumb doesn’t feel as stable as it used to.
Additionally, I don’t expect too much from Athena in terms of offensive performance, but in the latest generation, the racket has improved its attack efficiency using the same level of carbon fiber, balance point, and stiffness by upgrading the production process.
The application of new nanomolecule clusters reduces energy loss when hitting and increases energy transfer efficiency, ensuring that each attack transfers the force more completely to the shuttle. Combined with Athena‘s highly maneuverable characteristics, I can continuously apply power from the backcourt without worrying much about stamina, which effectively allows me to increase the pace of the game at any time. The initial speed of smashes is also quite impressive, focusing on sudden attacks. However, if you face a skilled opponent, whether a powerful smash can score is another story—but let’s just treat it as a racket that can be casually used for attack. Still, don’t underestimate it—this makes Athena 2 a piece of equipment that can be used for serious competition.
What reassures me the most is that in passive or defensive situations, it outperforms the first generation. Especially in situations where you have to scramble to retrieve a deep corner shot after a heavy smash, Athena 2 helps you handle it with more grace.
Unlike other Bolly products that emphasize directness, crispness, and stability with the Wuqie core technology, Athena sacrifices some of its competitive potential to significantly improve its ease of use, resulting in a unique experience. The upgrade direction of Athena is therefore quite clear.
Overall, Athena 2 performs excellently in its positioning, and in terms of user experience, it even outshines other lightweight, flexible, and elastic rackets like the NF600 from the big three manufacturers. Given its actual price, I believe Athena 2 will be an attractive option for players at various skill levels.
September 20, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny STAR CLOUD Reviews
The days still begin with caffeine and end with zolpidem.
Sometimes, even when holding a racket I’ve never used before, I’ve lost the excitement and curiosity I used to have during tests. Instead, there’s just a faint sense of dread about completing the task.
I still haven’t returned to the joyful state I was in before. But since the Sky Realm series has more than just the Star Shadow, I might as well continue with the simple goal of distinguishing each of them bit by bit.
Specifications: 4UG5, with grip tape, total weight 91.7g in use, balance point 278mm, shaft length 220mm, soft flex, fluid box-shaped frame, 76-hole string bed, 9-3 o’clock groove, warranty up to 26 lbs, strung at 24–26 lbs with VBS66N.
Since it’s from the same series, there are naturally no major changes in terms of style. The Star Cloud‘s frame pattern has transformed into a design resembling swirling clouds, making it visually richer. The color scheme has shifted to blue-gray, which still looks very refreshing. The grommets have turned yellow, but aside from that, there’s no difference. However, neither in design nor specifications do the three models of the Sky Realm series show much variation—so are they essentially the same racket?
As the testing progressed, the differences between the Star Cloud and Star Shadow started to emerge. After adding the grip tape, the Star Shadow‘s weight became higher but its balance point lower. This is likely due to quality control issues, adding an element of unpredictability. The Star Cloud’s balance point is an astonishingly low 278mm, which I’ve never seen before. Perhaps it’s due to the product’s large tolerance, which makes my Star Shadow something of a lucky gem.
When held, the feel of the Star Cloud is just as solid as the Star Shadow, and at this stage, it’s hard to tell the difference between the two. But when swung, you can feel that the Star Cloud is more agile in raising the racket and less prone to deformation during swings. This helps explain its performance in match situations.
A lower balance point means improved agility for the racket. During the warm-up, when practicing high clears, compared to the Star Shadow, the Star Cloud offers more direct feedback upon hitting the shuttle. The sluggish feel of the shot is reduced, and while the Star Cloud is just as easy to use, its power-absorbing to power-releasing ratio is slightly lower. Given that the Star Cloud’s strings are two weeks newer than the Star Shadow’s, I believe it at least indicates one thing: the Star Cloud‘s shaft stiffness is slightly higher. This was also confirmed during defensive play—when receiving smashes or when using power to lift the shuttle diagonally, the feedback felt more crisp and precise, with clearer and easier-to-execute lifts.
The increase in stiffness significantly enhances the competitive experience.
Let’s start with high clears and smashes. Due to the Star Cloud’s firmer shot output, the power threshold is slightly higher, but the shaft can store more energy, resulting in more direct feedback and crisper shots. By focusing energy more precisely, the Star Cloud can deliver fast flat clears, demonstrating a certain level of explosiveness. However, with backcourt drops or sliced shots, the shuttle tends to snag in the frame and string bed, often resulting in drop shots falling short, which will need some adjustment over time.
The feel of flat drives has significantly improved, with the racket capable of handling consecutive exchanges and providing faster shot responses, giving me more confidence to engage my opponent in rallies near the net. However, due to the shaft’s longer recovery time after deformation during continuous swings, there’s a risk of mistimed shots when the pace picks up.
The Star Cloud might be the best racket in the Sky Realm series for smashes. The improved shaft texture gives the smashes more power—it no longer feels weak. When practicing smashes, especially when someone feeds high shots, the Star Cloud exhibits a strong “syrupy” feel, reminiscent of the TK15. Despite its low balance point, its light weight makes it easier to judge the optimal timing to hit the shuttle at the highest point for an attack, without the shuttle floating out of control. Whether it’s steep or powerful smashes, the shots clearly have more power, while still maintaining decent follow-through capabilities. You can think of it as a softer version of the 9001, which should make it easier to understand.
I’m still taking it easy, but the Star Cloud has improved my competitive performance, and that’s my impression of it. I’m glad that through this racket, I’ve been able to regain a bit of my old form.
September 20, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny Classic Carbon J20-010 Reviews
I received the 009 sample racket, and I immediately fell in love with it. The speed experience of the 009 is, to this day, the pinnacle of Pollen’s works in terms of swing speed. It’s light, bouncy, and despite its shortcomings, it has been the best consolation for me since losing the 90S. At that time, despite its instability and lack of solidity, I chose the 009 as my main racket for quite a long period.
However, after trying the 46w, which shares the same lineage but with a different tuning, I was struck by its aggressive performance. I had to consider a longer-term question: How far can the 009 take me?
Specifications: 4UG5, empty weight 84g, balance point 295mm, total weight 84.6g without grip tape, full aerodynamic frame, 8-4 o’clock groove, 76-hole string bed, warranty up to 30 pounds, string tension 24—26 lbs with VBS66N.
In terms of appearance, there are a few differences between the 010 and the 009. One is the color of the cone cap, which is white on the 009 and black on the 010. Another difference is the color of the drip-like design near the T-joint, which is yellow on the 009 and white on the 010. Finally, the frame patterns have some minor color variations. Despite these subtle differences, the 010 still looks great and maintains its youthful appearance. Compared to the more striking 46w and F35a, the 010 exudes a more rebellious aura.
There’s a small detail: both the F35a and 010 are 4U, but the former weighs more by over 1 gram when strung without grip tape. Considering that the 010 is made according to the 84g specification, there might be some deviation in both rackets’ weights.
Last year, I wasn’t aware of the existence of the 010 version of the J20. Based on my limited understanding of Pollen, I tended to believe that different models from the same period usually only differed in appearance and specifications, while their essence remained similar. So when I learned about the 010, I didn’t pay much attention to it and didn’t develop any interest.
However, when I took the 010 to the court for a warm-up, I felt something was different—it has changed. There’s no doubt that the 009 is lighter and faster, but the 010 provides better adaptability. Although the slight increase in weight doesn’t visibly affect fast-paced continuous swings, the 010 performs noticeably better in high clears, giving me more confidence. The merchant informed me that the 009 was made according to an 82g specification, while the 010 is 84g. This 2-gram difference is like adding a bit of salt when making red bean paste—though it slightly reduces the sweetness, it enhances the overall flavor and adds depth.
I didn’t realize this until I tested them side by side on the court. Despite the 009 being more agile in flat drives and blocks, the 010 is more stable and less reckless in fast-paced situations. The 010’s feel and directional control are improved, reducing impulsiveness. In the front court, the 009’s quick response and control are excellent, but in defensive situations in the back court, the 009’s lack of a decisive back court winning ability can be exploited by a skilled opponent. The 010, however, offers greater stability and torsional resistance, allowing me to maintain control over more rallies and open up my opponent’s defense through more accurate and strategic shots.
Overall, the additional carbon in the 010 provides better support for higher string tensions and improves the racket’s stability and torsional resistance. While it may not directly score points, it allows the player to take the initiative in more rallies and exploit its good directional control to break through the opponent’s defense. Considering its overall performance, the 010 is actually more suitable for a broader range of players.
Among the four versions of the J20 series, my ranking is as follows: for agility and swing speed under the same specifications: 009 > 010 > F35 ≥ 46w; for sweetness: 010 ≥ 009 > F35 ≥ 46w; for offensive quality and physical exertion: 46w ≥ F35 >> 010 ≥ 009; for subjective feel and control quality: F35 ≥ 010 ≥ 46w > 009. For singles players, a racket with a higher balance point is better, particularly for back court offensive needs. For those seeking a comfortable experience, front court play, or those with less power or amateur female players, the 009/010 might be more suitable.
September 19, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny Classic Carbon 1982 B153 & BlackMamba5 Reviews
I’m always eager to try out new Pollen products. On one hand, the brand’s pricing system is stable; flagship products on online channels are often launched at more than 50% off compared to the major brands. On the other hand, Pollen’s rackets consistently perform well in terms of feel and competitive performance, catering to players at all levels, and almost always providing a “safe bet” recommendation.
However, this also means that some of Pollen’s excellent models are more prone to being out of stock due to production limitations, especially the “boron fiber” upgrade products, which have been notoriously difficult to find over the past year. This even led to rare instances where specific models saw a price inversion in the second-hand market.
As they say, “Early birds get the worm.”
Specifications:
- B212: 4U G5, with paint, total weight 93.68g, balance point 295mm, 6.5mm middle rod, length 218mm, medium hardness, box-shaped frame, 78-hole string bed, 9-3 point string groove, warranty up to 30 pounds, string tension 25-27lbs VBS69N.
- Black Mamba Pro: 4U G5, without paint, total weight 90.11g, balance point 303mm, 6.3mm middle rod, length 220mm, high hardness, wind-breaking frame, 72-hole string bed, 9-3 point string groove, warranty up to 30 pounds, string tension 25-27lbs Li Ning N68.
Design and Appearance: The two new models are hot off the press, and their designs reflect their different series. The B212 and B213 are part of the latest 1982 series, maintaining the InterstellaX theme with a space-age feel. The frame has a touch of black lining at the 2 and 10 o’clock positions, and a glossy finish, creating a clear distinction from the 213. The paint quality remains at Pollen’s flagship level.
The Black Mamba Pro, on the other hand, stands out with its unique design elements. The racket is entirely black, with the Pollen cloud mark replaced by a cobra emblem, reminiscent of the Ford Mustang Shelby GT500. The two venomous fangs at the top of the frame add to its aggressive look, and the use of high-reflective stickers in purple, bronze, and silver creates a visually striking effect. The ultra-thin middle rod adds a touch of sophistication, though some elements appear inspired by the Thunder series.
Performance: The main upgrade for the B212 is the addition of boron fiber, and the racket’s hardness has been adjusted to accommodate the new material. While the racket’s face remains similar to previous models, the increased middle rod hardness moves it away from being a “sugar-water” racket, introducing a slightly higher usage threshold. From the feel of rallying in the backcourt, the B212 provides a more “solid” hit, allowing for high ball speeds. This version retains the advantages of easy power generation and leverage, making the B212 more aggressive in handling long shots, while maintaining precision and accuracy, integrating some of the hard-core 1982 genes.
The Black Mamba Pro, being even harder, offers a more direct feedback with its ultra-thin middle rod. This results in a higher difficulty level for the sweet spot, making it more suitable for advanced players. While it may seem easier to use for aggressive shots, it becomes more demanding in slightly passive scenarios, requiring greater effort from the user. Compared to the B212, it exhibits a more extreme side that fits its product profile.
The B212 is considered an offensive racket but has a slightly lower hardness compared to the 213. The boron fiber upgrade makes it more elastic in attack compared to other 1982 models. With the increased hardness in the middle rod, it can handle explosive power better, with reduced shock and a more substantial feel on impact. Unlike the B155/152, which relies on frame weight for power, the B212’s strength comes more from the middle rod’s rebound. This new material finally provides a racket that feels confident for attacking from the backcourt in mixed doubles, although it took some time to adjust.
In contrast, the Black Mamba Pro excels as a professional offensive racket. It might feel slightly lighter in hand, but its pronounced head weight enhances its downward shot tendencies. Even with less concentrated force, it can deliver downward shots. When attacking, the new 6.3mm middle rod shows impressive explosive power, with a noticeable whip-like feel and sharp sound, encouraging players to extract more energy from it. It can deliver both sharp and heavy shots, with each strike being potentially lethal.
Comparison: Both rackets were able to keep up with my doubles play, though they differed in swing speed and flexibility. Overall, the Black Mamba Pro’s wind-breaking frame provides superior swing speed, proven in the backcourt with sustained aggressive pressure. This consistent attack is a comprehensive trait, with quick middle rod recovery also playing a crucial role. However, the B212, with its slightly lower head weight, is quicker in the initial swing and offers better flexibility, which is advantageous for intercepting and front-court play, providing more stable and forgiving performance.
Regarding net play and backcourt control, the two rackets have clear distinctions. The Black Mamba Pro offers a stiffer feel with a smaller sweet spot, making precise angle and power adjustments more challenging, which might result in a slightly higher error rate for delicate shots. The B212, with a longer contact time and more adjustment space, offers more confidence in delicate backcourt shots and net play, making it more effective for handling small balls and disrupting the opponent’s strategy.
Conclusion: The boron fiber and 6.5mm middle rod of the B212 provide a predictable upgrade in performance, while the 6.3mm middle rod of the Black Mamba Pro offers stronger impact. Having previously expressed concerns about the pace of updates in certain series, the recent releases with Pollen’s latest middle rod technology have shown significant improvements compared to their predecessors. The Black Mamba Pro inherits traits from the Pro 2.2/Princess frame, which remains unmatched until further updates. However, the feel of this frame is more rigid and shock-inducing, explaining why it hasn’t been as popular as other models. In contrast, the 1982 series remains evergreen, though the positioning of the B212 and B213 seems inconsistent with official promotional materials. Is there any need for clarification on this?
September 19, 2024
Badminton Racket Bonny Classic Carbon Infinity IF215 Reviews
When I was improving my game, the Infiniti series felt fantastic, but recently, I’ve hit a plateau and find it less effective. It’s fair to say that this series, among Babolat’s self-developed frame series, has seen the least progress. From Infiniti 2 and 003 to 016 and Glory 002, the series has primarily focused on adjustments and optimizations rather than major breakthroughs. Since the introduction of 46T in 014, subsequent models have largely focused on balance point and stiffness. Now that the series has adopted a new numbering method and reached 215, Babolat likely hopes to achieve some breakthroughs.
Specifications:
- 4UG5
- With cap
- Total weight: 95.90g (in used condition)
- Balance point: 300mm
- Shaft thickness: 6.5mm
- Length: 220mm
- Stiffness: High
- Thin-wing small frame
- 76-hole string bed
- Full string grooves
- Warranty: 30 lbs
- Strung with VBS66N at 25-27 lbs
The Infiniti series traditionally uses a no-filler construction and applies varnish and water decals for decoration. While earlier models like 008-010 had their unique themes, this approach seemed to have reached its limit by 016, with some models even falling short compared to the early Infiniti 2’s pearlescent finish. The 215 has significantly improved in this regard, featuring more colored paint. The head transitions from white to teal at 4 and 8 o’clock, then to black at the T-head, creating a natural gradient. Although the official promotion describes it as a racing-themed paint style, the aesthetics are what matter most.
The current version has adjusted the balance point to 300mm. While not as aggressive as the Glory series I used, it still provides a noticeable head-heavy feel. Originally positioned as an offensive racket, the Infiniti series’s excellent frame wind resistance made me prefer it for doubles as a speed racket. The 215 maintains a high swing speed, similar to previous versions, with the full string grooves being a longstanding feature from Babolat.
However, the 215’s harder shaft and smaller head make it less user-friendly. Despite a relatively large sweet spot, increased string tension further raises the driving difficulty of the racket. The high balance point allows for effective power shots, but it becomes more challenging to generate power for defensive shots and net plays, which may limit its usability.
On the flip side, the 215 demonstrates a high ceiling for offensive play. Its small frame naturally provides a higher power threshold and more focused rebound feedback. When a player uses their power effectively, the racket delivers explosive shots. The lower wind resistance and fast swing speed contribute to rapid reactions. Although its 300mm balance point is not as high as Glory’s, it still outperforms the 295mm Lamberti in terms of placement and power.
The current weight allows for relatively agile handling, making quick transitions between forehand and backhand shots easier and maintaining stability during fast exchanges. The racket’s stability and directional control provide confidence in angled shots and precise placements. However, it still demands a high level of arm strength, and fatigue can lead to decreased shot quality and slower returns, giving opponents opportunities to pressure.
Previously, small-frame rackets weren’t ideal for my touch shots, but the 215’s improved feel has enhanced its performance. Although the racket’s small head can still cause some erratic shots during fine control, its overall stability has improved. Especially for backcourt drop shots, the increased frame inertia helps guide the shuttle closer to the net without the worry of being intercepted.
In defense, the 215 offers clear feedback for shots like lifting and blocking, but it faces challenges in two areas. Firstly, its small head offers less tolerance, making it difficult to react to fast shots and locate the shuttle accurately. Secondly, handling drop shots and soft touches becomes harder, particularly when fatigued, leading to less effective shots and potential form issues.
Despite the “buy new, not old” mindset, the Infiniti 215 remains one of the best small-frame rackets for those wanting to experience Babolat’s small-frame capabilities. It represents the highest quality within the series. However, it’s disappointing that the Infiniti series still lacks substantial progress, with the latest model mainly adjusting existing parameters. The boron fiber technology that significantly improved Babolat’s newer models has not yet been applied to the new Infiniti, which might be due to compatibility or production constraints. Nonetheless, incremental improvements in aesthetics alone might not satisfy long-time fans of the series.
September 19, 2024