Before I get into this, I realize that the content in question in this thread is all purely semantics and has no real utility value in real life – I just like my neat and orderly categories ;D

So lately I’ve noticed some terminology being thrown around which seems to contradict some of my understanding of the terminology we as yoyoers use to categorize a yoyo’s size. For example I’ve seen the term “undersized” used to describe what I’d consider “mini,” “midsized” where I would use “full sized” and so on.

My current understanding of the various sizing categories based on diameter is as follows:

25ish mm: flea sized/ultra mini
48mm and under: mini
49-51.9mm: undersized
52-53.9mm: midsized
54-56.9mm: fullsized
57+mm: oversized

And of course with recent trends in yoyo design, we now have a superwide or “wide” classification of yoyos based on the width/diameter ratio being at anywhere from about 90% (SPYY Revenger, X3 Stampede) to over 100% (YYF Superwide/Monster) and the actual width measurement tends to be 47mm or over. It seems to me like the superwide classification of yoyos effectively evades all other size classifications despite this being based primarily on the ratio of width to diameter in contrast with the other categories which are purely based on diameter size.

This system also leaves some room for some interesting outliers. For example, the Clash Cube by YYR has an exact 1:1 width:diameter ratio, yet its 44mm width is not as big as superwide yoyos tend to be. So would we classify the Clash Cube as superwide based on the diameter:width ratio, or mini based on the 44mm diameter?

What are your thoughts, nation? Is my understanding of these sizing categories correct, or has it just gone obsolete as the trends in the yoyo market have changed?

I agree with the diameter classification that you proposed, and what I see about width to diameter ratio, its almost completely different criteria.

By this I mean, what I see now people just say what’s wide is wide, what’s undersize is undersize.
width and diameter is what make different characteristic of the yoyo after all.

What I see, is that diameter is the primary category to define yoyo sizing, after that, other ratios comes in.

For the clash cube, I would categorized it as a mini yoyo, based on the diameter. The width to diameter ratio comes next.

This is what I’ve always thought.

the frst few months i started i liked undersized now i like regular size or oversized

Seems right to me.

Also have a feeling you posted this on another forum too.

Yeah lol. I mentioned that in the “why does everyone like undersized throws?” thread when I first said that I’d be bringing the discussion over here.