Ideal Height?

[adamc_72]

Dear Jonas,

I was just wondering if there is an ideal height for a badminton player?

I am about 6'2" and was wondering if this is an advantage-disadvantage-or no factor, compared to an 'average' height person?

Thank you for your time,

Sincerely,

A. Chatelois

[JR]

Dear Jonas,

I was just wondering if there is an ideal height for a badminton player?

I am about 6'2" and was wondering if this is an advantage-disadvantage-or no factor, compared to an 'average' height person?

Thank you for your time,

Sincerely,

A. Chatelois

Hi A. Chatelois!!

Over time it´s been proven that all kinds of heights can be a winning height. Take for ex. Thomas Lund which was very high, can´t remember the exact height compared with asian players like Hendrawan.

I think it´s more in your mind. All heights will do if you capitalize on your advantages due to your height.

Kind Regards

Jonas

[shawn30_k]

ehx jr since we are on this topic just asking from your experience how tall were u when you were about 15 and did you continue growing after that.any advice on how to grow taller.

[fanatico]

6"2, thats so tall!

[tinkerbella122]

6"2, thats so tall!Yeah ... I'm only about 5 feet . But then again , I'm only thirteen so there's still some time for me to grow ;)

P.S. Being tall v.s small have it's own advantage and disadvantages . How tall you are doesn't really matter that much .

See - http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16414&highlight=height

[shawn30_k]

well im 15 but im only around 5ft3 or 5ft4.around 1.64m.:crying:

[German Player]

me is 16 and i have 1.86m :)

Have friend he is about 1.95
but it isnt really an advantage for him :)

[MikeJ]

a friend of mine who was in our country's junior national team way back in the early 90's played doubles in an international competition against two guys from The Netherlands. The first guy was 6 feet 8inches tall and the second guy was 6 feet 10 inches tall. He said that when the 6'10" guy would jump smash from near the baseline, the shuttle would land slightly pass my friend's front service line. :eek:

[goku999]

There is no ideal hieght for badminton.
Im 17 and am 5ft 6 and im having no probs with badminton.
The taller person will have an advantage with offensive shots producing steep and fast smashes but may be a bit more vulnerable at the net than a smaller person.
Smaller people will find is difficult at the rear and will generally prefer the net and middle section of the court however they are generally more agile.

The more agile u are, the less likely u will lose a game as u will be more likely to return fast shots.

This all what i think.

Being tall is good if u are an offensive player and like smashing at the back.
Being small u will favour the net area and middle but u will be rushing and leaping to hit shots - you are more agile and badminton is all out speed more than power.

Ideal height would be about average 5ft 10 to 6ft 2??

[Mark A]

Morning all,

Goku999 is right, there's no ideal height for badminton (that is, excessive height provides no inherent advantage as in other sports such as basketball, where the aim is to throw a ball into a target 10 feet in the air). This is part of the appeal of badminton (almost anybody can play it, if not well:D). However, the simple presence of the net does give a lower limit to the feasible height of a player (anyone under around 5' 3'' will have trouble striking downwards close to the net).

As to the pros/cons of tall vs. short: as Goku999 said, being tall gives beter angle for overhead shorts (and a longer reach as well) but makes retrieving the bird from near the floor more difficult. Also, the taller players seem to have more difficulty dealing with net-height drives (especially towards the non-racket shoulder). The shorter players receive these shots at a more comfortable head-height and so can respond better.

Having said all this, one of my regular doubles partners is 14 years old and about 4ft 9in (his head comes up to my armpit:o) and he is probably the most agile net player I've ever seen, as he's on the floor diving about 80% of the time. More importantly, his mind is perfectly attuned to badminton, so he knows where to place a shot even if he doesn't quite get it there every single time. Just shows what good mentality can allow you to overcome...

[jerby]

There is no ideal hieght for badminton.
Im 17 and am 5ft 6 and im having no probs with badminton.
The taller person will have an advantage with offensive shots producing steep and fast smashes but may be a bit more vulnerable at the net than a smaller person.
Smaller people will find is difficult at the rear and will generally prefer the net and middle section of the court however they are generally more agile.

The more agile u are, the less likely u will lose a game as u will be more likely to return fast shots.

This all what i think.

Being tall is good if u are an offensive player and like smashing at the back.
Being small u will favour the net area and middle but u will be rushing and leaping to hit shots - you are more agile and badminton is all out speed more than power.

Ideal height would be about average 5ft 10 to 6ft 2??
....Then I'm the exeption...I'm 6ft5..1.95m and love netplay. height hasn't really been a disadvantage..yet...

[Birdy]

Tall people cover up the court more, and requires lesser energy to produce a shot due to a greater torque. Shorter people have more stamina, and are generally faster. However, height does not really matter as training and talent is exceedingly more important.

[venkatesh]

Kido stands only 5'5". But he's more of a back player than Setiawan, who stands 5'11".Kido's got a very powerful smash and is very agile at the back, whereas Setiawan is really impressive at the front court.
Lee Hyong Jung is a very tall woman. But in mixed and women's doubles, she's better at the front court.
Lee Hyong Jung's partner, Lee Kyung Won, stands only 5'3", but she executes a much stronger smash.
Tall and short players have their advantages and disadvantages. It's just a matter of how they use it.

more here: http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?p=959707

[arthurkii]

wow 6'2", i think being tall is an advantage in most sports, just have to know how to fully utilize this asset of yours; should play offense more and develop killer smash that we short people can only dream of.

[arthurkii]

hey i used to skip 200 ~300 times daily followed immediately by a lot of stretching; it helped me to grow another 5cm after 16. hope this helps

[Birdy]

wow 6'2", i think being tall is an advantage in most sports, just have to know how to fully utilize this asset of yours; should play offense more and develop killer smash that we short people can only dream of.

Dude.. im only 5.2 without shoes, and i can execute a smash at 250km/h +. Its a matter of training like I say. It doesn't matter how tall or short you are, you can always be better if you practice. Being tall is an advantage in some sport, but being short also has its advantages where tall people dont have. Hope this helps ~:D

[V1lau]

Also depends what kind of 6'2 you are ... are you too tall for you body height or are you bulky or just right ... I once knew a kid who was 6'7 and he couldn't even dunk a basketball :eek: and conversly I know a guy who is like 5'7 who could dunk 2 handed. Needless to say, you can imagine which one would most likely win in a badminton game.

There is no ideal height, but there are ideal attributes such as superior hand eye coordination, more fast twitch muscle, high real time adaptability, lots of money:cool: ...etc. I think its better to ask "is my game and strategy maximizing my height, attributes, and abilities"?

Anyways just my honest opinion and know that I'm a bit on the shorter side so there might be a bit of bias with regards to this question.:p

[Swingbadabada]

Imo height doesn't make a difference if you play trhe right shots - at my club there is someone 6ft 3 he has a good advantage on returning serve bu apart from that his technique is appaling

[egibney]

A lot depends on the event your playing, but really almost any height can be successful like JR says. You just need to tailor your playing style to your build. However, I have noticed that the number of giants in men's singles has shrunk considerably as the game has gotten faster and more dynamic physically. I doubt a player like Thomas Stuer Lauridsen would have the same level of success that he had before. Perhaps someone will prove me wrong on that one though.

[Danstevens]

Being tall is good if u are an offensive player and like smashing at the back.
Being small u will favour the net area and middle but u will be rushing and leaping to hit shots - you are more agile and badminton is all out speed more than power.

Ideal height would be about average 5ft 10 to 6ft 2??

Not sure about that, I'm short but an offensive player. I can smash from pretty much everywhere on the court and don't feel I have a disadvantage when playing someone taller.

[fuger]

not so important...

[george@chongwei]

not so important...
hello, welcome to the forum;)

[Destricto_Ense]

I'm pushing 6'3", I haven't found it to be much a disadvantage although I'm probably a bit slow around the court. Still, if your mind is quick enough you should be able to get to any place in the court in time, height regardless.

[Timbuctoo]

This is interesting, sports science would say that every sport has an ideal body shape. Badminton is an odd one as it is dominated by shorter people on average but that's subject to the sports popularity in Asia.

Tall people can be just as effective or even more so if their body shape compliments the height. A tall heavy build person can't move around as easily but a tall thin to average build person can. Short people aren't always faster than tall people and tall people aren't always aerobically fitter.

I recently watched a World Championship final between Peter Rassmusan (excuse my spelling) and a chinese player (late 90s). Peter moved around the court very efficiently and by the end of the game the shorter Chinese player could hardly walk and needed medical help.

So rather than height I'd suggest body shape, fitness & footwork are more important. This is not as clear cut & dry and other sports like weight lifting or sprinting.

[Danstevens]

Yeah, it doesn't really matter if you're short or tall; the most important things are technique and fitness. With those, whatever height you are, you can be successful in badminton.

[laonong]

[quote=Timbuctoo;1035564]This is interesting, sports science would say that every sport has an ideal body shape. Badminton is an odd one as it is dominated by shorter people on average but that's subject to the sports popularity in Asia.

Tall people can be just as effective or even more so if their body shape compliments the height. A tall heavy build person can't move around as easily but a tall thin to average build person can. Short people aren't always faster than tall people and tall people aren't always aerobically fitter.

I recently watched a World Championship final between Peter Rassmusan (excuse my spelling) and a chinese player (late 90s). Peter moved around the court very efficiently and by the end of the game the shorter Chinese player could hardly walk and needed medical help.
quote]


That's because Sun JUN was already injured before the game.

[Timbuctoo]

Maybe the case but it looked like cramping from de-hydration to me. His muscles just gave up. Rassmusan was awesome in that game, best court movement I've seen for a big guy and something I wish I could copy.

[OHMAHGAWDZ]

from my own experiences in both playing and coaching, I've found that taller players find forward/backward movement easier (takes less steps). Shorter players seem to have an advantage when it comes to quick movements to the sides (returning fast drops/half smashes in singles). As a tall person, I find the shoulder turn that is necessary for sideward movement quite difficult. Shorter players don't seem to have this problem. Shorter players also have an advantage on defence, because they can bend lower and counter-attack smashes more easily. These, however, are merely trends that I've seen, not an absolute fact.

[venkatesh]

from my own experiences in both playing and coaching, I've found that taller players find forward/backward movement easier (takes less steps). Shorter players seem to have an advantage when it comes to quick movements to the sides (returning fast drops/half smashes in singles). As a tall person, I find the shoulder turn that is necessary for sideward movement quite difficult. Shorter players don't seem to have this problem. Shorter players also have an advantage on defence, because they can bend lower and counter-attack smashes more easily. These, however, are merely trends that I've seen, not an absolute fact.

Wohooo!!! Way to go, little people!!!

The world is big but lil' people turn it around
A worm can roll a stone
A bee can sting a bear
A fly can fly around versailles 'cos flies don't care
A sparrow in a hat, can make a happy home
A flea can bite the bottom of the pope in rome

[nicholasl]

I believe that being fit is more important than height. :)

Anyway, am 5'11 here. I notice most of the top players in the world are ard 5'8 to 6"0.

[bradmyster]

im 6'2 aswell. TBH height doesnt mean much. If your tall you have that angle but lose speed due to more body to throw around the court. Smaller your faster but have less reach to the shuttle.

In other words. Whatever your height you have the potential to be a great badminton player. If you have the natural ability and positive mindset to progress and improve, then you will. :)

[SuperBird]

Height is a huge factor in TENNIS.....because of the ability to SMash Serve over hand. Can you imagine if badminton allowed to serve the OVER-HAND:Smashed....this will put Badminton into a whole different game.

Advantage of HEIGHT:
1) easy to drop, easy to Smashed deep w/out too much jumping, good reach wide shot & good for up close net play.
2)Great for Double and not for single

Disadvantage:
1) poor recover time when someone Drop on you, too much bending can cause painful back problem.
2)Very difficult for defending smash shot toward mid-body cause your arm is to long, less reaction time to pull racket toward center.
3) Too big of a target body shot, and just defending shot reaction is much slower than an average height person with speed.


In my opinion, It very difficult to be the World Single Player if you are above 6'2FT or taller.
Just like the world best gymnastic: You don't see them over 6FT or else, speed & ability to react is too slow.

Height is an advantage in basketball, swimming, long-distant runner, Tenis, Volleyball,

Average height or at least 5'3FT w/ speed and ability:
Advantage: Soccer, gymnastic, GOLF, badminton, jockey, ........

In the world of Badminton: SPEED + POWER + TECHNIQUE + EXPERIENCE = A GREAT PLAYER NO MATTER WHAT HEIGHT YOU ARE.

YOU CAN BE MUSCULAR , 6'3 ft, ABILITY TO LIFT OVER 200 LBS----->>> AN DON'T HAVE THE TECHNIQUE OR never play the game: 90% likely if someone bet you to hit the shuttlecock over the net...to at least mid-court: YOU FEEL LIKE THIS IS LIKE HITTING AIR------->>>>> AND EVEN A 8 Y/O TRAIN KID under 5ft' can Smash this bird like a sling-shot.........

[laivc]

There is no such thing as idea height for badminton. Whether you are tall or short, just play based on your own styles and enjoy the games. Cheers.

[WhiteRice94]

well, my ideal would be 7'3, where my short serves would be like smashes.

[narnia]

As I said before, in doubles at least one of the players needs to be tall enough; but need not be positioned in the back; look at Kido and JJS but they need tall partners to block the returns from their smashes.

But in singles, height doesn't matter to be top, they can cover with great footworks; see taufic, LCW, etc. Nevertheless, height matters somewhat to be in the highest places of the rank.

:)

[koaylt]

As I said before, in doubles at least one of the players needs to be tall enough; but need not be positioned in the back; look at Kido and JJS but they need tall partners to block the returns from their smashes.

But in singles, height doesn't matter to be top, they can cover with great footworks; see taufic, LCW, etc. Nevertheless, height matters somewhat to be in the highest places of the rank.

:)
Sorry, i do not agree. I think being taller has a distinct advantage even at the highest level. You cannot compare Taufik or LCW as they are very fine talent from a very large population. 50% of the entire Asian men population is about their height. Whereas if you want some guy taller than Bao ChunLai, it is about 1% of the Asian population. If you can find a talent like BCL, you will probably get 50 guys as talented as him in the 1.70-75m range. In statistical perspective, if Taufik/LCW is a 1: 1,000,000 talent, then BCL is one-fiftieth i.e. 1: 20,000. BCL is considered on par with LCW/Taufik. So it is because he has the physique advantage to overcome and match the superb talent of Taufik/LCW.

As an adult with ordinary skill, I can beat even the best 9 year old kid, simply by my height advantage.

XXF, Wang Yihan, Wang Lin, Zhang Ning are very tall amongst the Chinese women population. Easily within the top 5% percentile. I am certain there are natural talents from the petite category, but not given the opportunity to develop further as world class players. Therefore, being tall gives you that advantage of being selected for further grooming.

On another front, if you look at Usain Bolt, 6ft5in, 100m World Record holder and Olympic Champion, his physical advantage is so obvious.

There is no ideal height. The taller the better (except gymnastics) when everything else is the same.

[llpjlau]

IMO, being tall is quite advantageous.
Coupled with good footwork in singles, you get more reach.
In doubles, you are much more intimidating at the net.

[narnia]

Sorry, i do not agree. I think being taller has a distinct advantage even at the highest level. You cannot compare Taufik or LCW as they are very fine talent from a very large population. 50% of the entire Asian men population is about their height. Whereas if you want some guy taller than Bao ChunLai, it is about 1% of the Asian population. If you can find a talent like BCL, you will probably get 50 guys as talented as him in the 1.70-75m range. In statistical perspective, if Taufik/LCW is a 1: 1,000,000 talent, then BCL is one-fiftieth i.e. 1: 20,000. BCL is considered on par with LCW/Taufik. So it is because he has the physique advantage to overcome and match the superb talent of Taufik/LCW.

As an adult with ordinary skill, I can beat even the best 9 year old kid, simply by my height advantage.

XXF, Wang Yihan, Wang Lin, Zhang Ning are very tall amongst the Chinese women population. Easily within the top 5% percentile. I am certain there are natural talents from the petite category, but not given the opportunity to develop further as world class players. Therefore, being tall gives you that advantage of being selected for further grooming.

On another front, if you look at Usain Bolt, 6ft5in, 100m World Record holder and Olympic Champion, his physical advantage is so obvious.

There is no ideal height. The taller the better (except gymnastics) when everything else is the same.

Sorry, I don't agree with you either. :)

Please check what I exactly said. To be the top-most rankers, you don't need to be tall. But tall height is advantageous only to be top-10 or 20 ranked.

One more thing to note is that tall guys are much more likely to be offended by the short and quick shots from relatively shorter guys - that's happening with LCW and Taufic who uses their height ironically tactically.

In the sense above, taller guys like BCL are more vulnerable to be attacked and hard to keep sharp control with their long arms and legs; check the videos of BCL to know this technically.

Furthermore, taller guys are more likely to be injured and once they are it would be more severe than shorter guys. Do you know BCL's on-going injury on his knee? He will soon get surgery on that. Check also the injuriy of Tine Rasmussen who is one of the tallest women in singles. If you like, check who gets the knee protection more. :)

In sum, it's not true especially in Badminton that the taller the better. There are always pros and cons. Practically, it's all up to each individual player's talent. But, as I said, in doubles, at least one of them needs to be tall. :)

[koaylt]

In my last sentence I wrote. "The taller the better when everything else is the same".

Imagine you are only 4 feet tall and I am a six footer. You got to have the skills of Lin Dan to beat me. Whether it is a 2 foot or 2 inch difference, the advantage is still there when everything else is the same. http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/images/icons/icon7.gif

[narnia]

In my last sentence I wrote. "The taller the better when everything else is the same".

Imagine you are only 4 feet tall and I am a six footer. You got to have the skills of Lin Dan to beat me. Whether it is a 2 foot or 2 inch difference, the advantage is still there when everything else is the same. http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/images/icons/icon7.gif

Yeah... the actual height distribution of players are not like that. If it's like that, you're gonna much more fall down while moving around to defend my fast attacks even with more spaces on your body. :)

[koaylt]

Yeah... the actual height distribution of players are not like that. If it's like that, you're gonna much more fall down while moving around to defend my fast attacks even with more spaces on your body. :)
I used to think that a tall player is more vulnerable to body smash. The target area for the body smash is larger compared to a shorter player. But having studied the bio-mechanics of the tall and short players, I concluded that a tall player can defend the body smash equally well, if not better. Two reasons.

Firstly. the area of sweep from cocked and uncocked wrist is the same for tall and short players. It is dependent on the length of the racket (std. 68 cm). Theoretically, no difference in area coverage. Secondly, it is well known that the best body smash is to aim at the hip of the opponent. However, if your opponent is very tall, his racket is short relative to his height and limbs. Meaning to say his racket face is relatively closer to his wrist compared to a short player. Also, he does not have to lift his arm so high to cover his hip with the racket face. Less time taken, better defence.

You will notice that in table tennis where most of the shots are coming at your hip level, yet most people can defend well, just manipulating their wrist using the short bat. Remember I said everything else the same.http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/images/icons/icon7.gif

[narnia]

I used to think that a tall player is more vulnerable to body smash. The target area for the body smash is larger compared to a shorter player. But having studied the bio-mechanics of the tall and short players, I concluded that a tall player can defend the body smash equally well, if not better. Two reasons.

Firstly. the area of sweep from cocked and uncocked wrist is the same for tall and short players. It is dependent on the length of the racket (std. 68 cm). Theoretically, no difference in area coverage. Secondly, it is well known that the best body smash is to aim at the hip of the opponent. However, if your opponent is very tall, his racket is short relative to his height and limbs. Meaning to say his racket face is relatively closer to his wrist compared to a short player. Also, he does not have to lift his arm so high to cover his hip with the racket face. Less time taken, better defence.

You will notice that in table tennis where most of the shots are coming at your hip level, yet most people can defend well, just manipulating their wrist using the short bat. Remember I said everything else the same.http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/images/icons/icon7.gif

Good reading from your study. Thank you. I have some comments on that.

The defense coverage might be not different for the short and tall guys. But it looks a study for the case of static conditions. Badminton is a very dynamic sports with all kinds of movements even with jerk, deceptions, etc. When I said of the vulnerability of taller players, I thought the practical situations happening in play or rally. Although it all depends on each player's talents, in general, much taller guys would experience more difficulties in controlling his or her body components and rackets in the fast-moving fast-changing situations. That's the weak points of taller players even with other advantages. (Men's games would be more appropriate for my discussion. But usually women's games are much slower so taller womens would be more advantageous on this matter of subject.)

AFAIK, in badminton, the usual target is known as the direction toward the shoulder holding the racket not hip like in ping-pong.

:)

[koaylt]

When everything else is equal(e.g. skills, mental strength, stamina, speed, etc), the taller player will have the advantage.
I hope this will be help to explain my point of view. An interesting comment from
PaulChow post#38, Does height matters?

one or two ppl mentioned earlier that being tall can be a disadvantage for the reasons that one is slower and not given as many opportunities to jump smash if they are tall. I don't understand why. Here's the way i see it...

Note: for the duration of this post, using the term, "taller" will mean proportionally taller (ie. If the 5'10 subject has a shoulder width of 20 inches, the 6'0 subject will have a shoulder width of about 20.56 inches, because a 2 inch increase in height is about a 2.8% differance in height. Also consider the subjects' weight to increase proportionally with height.) and to be in comparision to shorter person. Differential is in your discretion. :)

Correct me if im wrong, but isn't the point of jumpsmashing to gain the opportunity to hit a steeper angle, not to produce power? If one doesn't have to jump to produce the same angle as a short person, then: 1) If one does get a chance to jump they can produce superior angles (a proportionally taller person will also have a proportionally larger vertical leap) and 2) If they dont jump for a particular smash they still have the opportunity to hit with a decent angle. Also, supposing a taller person doesn't have as many opportunities to jump, they will be able to return to their base more quickly with no sacrifice in comparison to a much shorter person who needed to jump to produce the same angle as the taller person.

Why would being tall make one slow? For example, someone who is 1ft tall will not be able to move around the court effectively no matter how incredibly fit they are. Supposed this ultra fit person is suddenly 6'2 with the same proportions, they will now be incredibly fast at spanning the court. The same concept is true on a smaller scale when comparing someone who is 5'10 to being 6'. If the 6' person is a carbon copy of the 5'10 person except that the 6' person is proportionally taller, then the 6' person will have the advantage in both speed and power and will undoubtedly be the superior player of the two.

"But if you're taller, you have to hit the bird sooner of lifts/clears". How so? Consider this: For a short person, the angle of the lift/clear does not need to be as great to exceed the reach of their racket. Performing the kind of low clear that might put a lot of pressure on a shorter person would be suicide against a much taller person because it would be cut off early, defeating the purpose of the shot. The higher angle clear means the shuttle spends more time in the air; so although the tall person strikes the bird at a higher point, they generally have the same amount of time to get to the back.

Now taking the example of the 5'10 and the 6' person again, someone might say, "The taller person, although they have more muscle mass will not be able to hit the bird harder or clear more easily. That is almost solely dependant on technique.". While technique is the key, the 6' person posessing quality of technique equal to that of the 5'10 person will be able to apply more speed to the shuttle because the mass of the birdie and and the racket will be proportionally smaller to them. Therefore, the impulse required to produce the maximum shuttle speed the 5'10 person could muster will take less "effort" (in terms of what percent of the 6' tall person's capability they feel they are applying.). At maximum effort, the 6' person will be able to produce higher shuttle speed than the 5'10 person.

One more advantage, because the reach of a taller person is greater, they can receive shots to their sides more easily (granted they are not very low, discussed later on).

The disadvantages i see in being a proportionally taller person are:
1) Greater chance of being hit in the back of the head by your doubles partner. :p
2) Receiving body shots requires more awkward and therefore more time costly motions because the raquet face covers a proportionally smaller percentage of your body.
4) Striking the bird requires more coordination (the racket and shuttle are proportionally smaller to the taller person).

I'm not sure about this last one:
3) Receiving shots close to the ground is more difficult

Note: If you disagree with me on one or more of the preceeding points you won't hurt my feelings ;) just give a good explaination why

It seems like having the advantage in height, principally speaking, is to have the advantage in badminton. "If so, then why aren't the best badminton players all very tall?" Your answer is as good as mine on that one.

[SuperBird]

Yes, I don't mean to be a midget, I am talking about at least be at NET level or a little taller over the NET. And now add some speeds & skill = You're on the ways to the TOP. This is not basketball, volleyball or TENNIS: Unless badminton allow you to serve over-hand: then short guy need to do some hard-core jumping SERVE!!!!!

[SuperBird]

Here is a good example of a small 10 yr old boy playing in my tournament. Wait till he reach his teen years......This kid got MAD skill. Remember his name Vinson Chiu-FUTURE USA STARS........

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v3rjeEiVSwg

[soami]

Its a game of fitness n only fitness matters.Bao is winning because he is fit n not because he is tall.There r advantages n disadvantages but they eventually cancel each other out..only fitness matters.

[koaylt]

Its a game of fitness n only fitness matters.Bao is winning because he is fit n not because he is tall.There r advantages n disadvantages but they eventually cancel each other out..only fitness matters.
I think fitness no longer is as important because the game is much shorter with 21 points. Those with good attacking play will have the advantage.

[soami]

where do u think attacking play will come from.
You cant just send in one killer smash to win a rally..U ve to be generally fit in order to move in the court, make an opening and then exploit it.
Its basically as much power one can pack in his muscles without much mass.thats wat is important

[chupaeng]

hi, I'm 18 and I am only 5'2"

i haven't receive training, but i believe i am 4 out of 10 in terms of skill.

my reaction and recovery time is slow so i usually cannot reach for a cross-court drop.

what do you think? is it just training and experience i need? or my height and reach is doing a lot of damage?

[venkatesh]

hi, I'm 18 and I am only 5'2"

i haven't receive training, but i believe i am 4 out of 10 in terms of skill.

my reaction and recovery time is slow so i usually cannot reach for a cross-court drop.

what do you think? is it just training and experience i need? or my height and reach is doing a lot of damage?

... have you been playing badminton?

I guess you've answered your question. Your reaction and recovery time is slow, that's why you can't reach for a cross-court drop. Since you are not considerably tall, you have to compensate it with speed and good athleticism. Don't blame your height too much.

[ctjcad]

..and the video link inside, for more inspiration:cool::
http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=79774

[gamegood101]

im 6,2",slim and pretty fast,it helps but in the end fitness wins,i play tall,short people and i think ur game and fitness are far more important than height,so it helps in a way with smashes,but its no magic bullet to win matches,anyone whos fit with a great game can beat anyone who tall/short people.