Lets vote for New or Old point system.

[terry]

NEW
1)




OLD
1) Terry

[danielg]

NEW
1)




OLD
1) Terry

I have a question, will this have an effect on the IBF decision or it is just for your own personal information?

But my vote goes for the old system

[KeepinItClean]

i go with the old

[samtruong200]

i go wit old system

[jamesshieh88]

old system please. i'm pretty sure it's safe to say that the majority of BC will vote for the old system.

[kontrabando]

I'll go with old system

[terry]

I have a question, will this have an effect on the IBF decision or it is just for your own personal information?

But my vote goes for the old system

own personal information.No worry...:)

[danielg]

own personal information.No worry...:)

I was knid of hoping that you are somehow connected to the IBF and can use this survey to somehow either change or firm up their decision.

[terry]

I was knid of hoping that you are somehow connected to the IBF and can use this survey to somehow either change or firm up their decision.

Hahaha... i wish if this forum is read by them ...;)

I just tried with the new system just now. Less than 10 minutes finish one set!. And counting a bit confused. :confused: just feel like weird.

[silentheart]

IMHO, please don't cast your vote by mistake!!! Then we will see the why there was no reason to put up thios poll.

[DinkAlot]

I like the old 15x3 system better but I think for marketing and advertising purposes, the new system will work better.

Time will tell.

[Big Slick]

I voted for the new system, my two main reasons being:

(i) I think the scores from matches will more accurately reflect the difference between players.

(ii) It suits my style of play better!

[DinkAlot]

(ii) It suits my style of play better!

I'm curious, what's your style of play?

[Blue_Smash]

IMHO. 15 point system was perfectly fine.
I tried out the 21 point system a few times and it was irritating how the game is over in about 30 mins.
This is because it takes me a few good rallys before I can get my engine going.
Now due of the rally point, by the time I'm pumped for the game the first set is nearly over.:mad:

[colingsk]

[QUOTE=terry]NEW
1)




OLD
1) Terry
2) Colin


Reason
- The game is too fast and relies mainly on accuracy and mistakes of players (maybe this is the intention but takes away the tactical & strategy part of the game)
- Players tend to be too cautious and play a save game

Maybe its my first time using this point system and may change my opinion after a few more tries.

cheers

[splinter]

Actually.. till now.. i still really get it how the proposed new system works.. but as humans.. we tend to stick in our own comfort zone.. including me.. so i vote for the old system as I'm pretty used to it..

[DaN_fAn]

Actually and interestingly the IBF is experimenting with another scoring system- 11x5[5 games and each game being 11 pts ,rally point scoring].i found this info on the official Badminton Association of India website-
www.badmintonindia.org (http://www.badmintonindia.org)

So i think this poll can have 3 options instead of 2[the 3rd being 11x5].Details of the scoring of both types 21x3 and 11x5 [with examples from the WC]can be found on this exact homepage-
http://www.badmintonindia.org/bulletin/09/new%20scoring%20system%20menu.htm

I would like to see a new scoring in Badminton,preferably 11x5.here are my reasons-

1.let's stop being stereotypical.the present scoring is not exactly a smash hit so there should be room for something different.
2.in the present scoring,the score can tend to stagnate while rally point scoring ensures that the score is always ticking so audience do not get bored by the monotonous scoring[which can happen,let's admit it] and are always interested and are on their feet.
3.IBF infact is giving a good reason why changing the scoring might actually favour the players.they claim that if the matches are made shorter then in the long run a player's carrer may be prolonged.while this sounds funny if thought about actually makes complete sense.So if changing the Scoring can make Taufik or Your favourite player play for 2 yrs longer,then why not.however none of us would like to see the duration of the matches drastically reduced.that is more important.reduced by 5-7 minutes or so would be okay.
4.if we employ 11x5 kind of scoring there will be more game pts,which might arouse even more interest.
5.Probably most importantly if IBF do employ 11x5 or 21x3 then this can only be better for TV commercials and packaging.A 11x5 scoring system offers the luxury of 5 breaks instead of just 3.And if the 21x3 scoring system is imposed then if i am right a player[if he wishes]can take a one minute break at the 11th point which is also good.

Lastly i narrate from my own experience that rally point scoring is infact much more enjoyable to play and also definitely more enjoyable to watch as compared to the current scoring.so if u have not, maybe you should try playing/watching once with this sort of a scoring.


i know a lot or most of us like the present scoring.but having said that why not try the rally point scoring and THEN give your feedback.atleast I liked it after I tried it.

[newjazz]

hmmmmmm :rolleyes:

I still prefer old system... instead of thinking to 'modify' the current one, why don't IBF consider to give a break every half-set...
example: when one of the players reach 8 points, they can have a break for 90 seconds.
this will give a 'room' for TV commercial...
(and also time for spectators to have toilet break :D:D)






Actually and interestingly the IBF is experimenting with another scoring system- 11x5[5 games and each game being 11 pts ,rally point scoring].i found this info on the official Badminton Association of India website-
www.badmintonindia.org (http://www.badmintonindia.org)

So i think this poll can have 3 options instead of 2[the 3rd being 11x5].Details of the scoring of both types 21x3 and 11x5 [with examples from the WC]can be found on this exact homepage-
http://www.badmintonindia.org/bulletin/09/new%20scoring%20system%20menu.htm

I would like to see a new scoring in Badminton,preferably 11x5.here are my reasons-

1.let's stop being stereotypical.the present scoring is not exactly a smash hit so there should be room for something different.
2.in the present scoring,the score can tend to stagnate while rally point scoring ensures that the score is always ticking so audience do not get bored by the monotonous scoring[which can happen,let's admit it] and are always interested and are on their feet.
3.IBF infact is giving a good reason why changing the scoring might actually favour the players.they claim that if the matches are made shorter then in the long run a player's carrer may be prolonged.while this sounds funny if thought about actually makes complete sense.So if changing the Scoring can make Taufik or Your favourite player play for 2 yrs longer,then why not.however none of us would like to see the duration of the matches drastically reduced.that is more important.reduced by 5-7 minutes or so would be okay.
4.if we employ 11x5 kind of scoring there will be more game pts,which might arouse even more interest.
5.Probably most importantly if IBF do employ 11x5 or 21x3 then this can only be better for TV commercials and packaging.A 11x5 scoring system offers the luxury of 5 breaks instead of just 3.And if the 21x3 scoring system is imposed then if i am right a player[if he wishes]can take a one minute break at the 11th point which is also good.

Lastly i narrate from my own experience that rally point scoring is infact much more enjoyable to play and also definitely more enjoyable to watch as compared to the current scoring.so if u have not, maybe you should try playing/watching once with this sort of a scoring.


i know a lot or most of us like the present scoring.but having said that why not try the rally point scoring and THEN give your feedback.atleast I liked it after I tried it.

[CWB001]

Most players I know hate rally point scoring (or American scoring as it is known hereabouts).

I think it is valid to examine what will happen to the game with rally point scoring.

Most players are more conservative when they do not have the serve under the current system. This is because they stand to lose a point if they lose the rally.

The player serving is normally more aggressive and takes more risks because the penalty for a mistake is merely loss of serve.

This is coached into players from county level upwards.

Under rally point scoring both players stand to be punished by the loss of a point and, logically, both will play more conservatively with fewer risks taken.

The rallies are likely to be longer, with more safe shots, and I think that this will be less attractive to watch. Ironically, this may therefore have the opposite of IBF's desired effect by making the sport less marketable to TV viewers.

In addition, of course, the characteristic tension of a close-fought badminton encounter, with the serve changing hands several times and the score not moving, will be lost. This is not stagnation. Just because the score does not change does not mean that the game is not worth watching. Many football matches finish as 0-0 draws and the games are no less watchable for that.

I think it is also relevant to look at why IBF want to make changes, because I believe that their logic is flawed.

They believe that shorter matches will lead to better acceptance on TV.

Yet most of the sports that they are competing with, such as football and tennis, have much longer games overall. In the case of football there is no opportunity for an advertisement break for 45 minutes at a time. Yet this has to be the most televised sport globally.

Much better, surely, to give the referee power to call a time-out for televised matches only and leave the rules alone for untelevised ones. The time-out would, in reality, be called in agreement with the TV company.

The argument that shorter games will mean fewer injuries and that playing careers will be lengthened is a bit laughable really. Supreme fitness is currently a must for top-level badminton and shortened games could, perhaps, lead to players allowing their fitness to lapse somewhat - leading to more injuries.

In conclusion, then, I am fundamentally against rally point scoring.

I would not necessarily be against 5x11 as long as only the server could score. This would preserve the fundamentals of badminton while providing more advertisement opportunities.

However, the idea that there would be more game points is not necessarily better as the 5x9 debacle proved.

In my view, an even better way to ensure TV audiences is to improve the techniques of coverage. Static cameras from behind the baseline make the game look slow and easy to play. Corner cameras give a more exciting feel.

Regards,

Cliff

[DaN_fAn]

In addition, of course, the characteristic tension of a close-fought badminton encounter, with the serve changing hands several times and the score not moving, will be lost. This is not stagnation. Just because the score does not change does not mean that the game is not worth watching. Many football matches finish as 0-0 draws and the games are no less watchable for that.


But people know how good football can get so they will enjoy even a 0-0 match.But that is not the case in badminton.Basically if people[general people who do not know much about badminton] get to watch a 'boring' badminton match on TV,they will not say that the match was boring.they will just declare badminton as 'boring'.They have no idea how good badminton can get and how enjoyable it is to watch an interesting match.Something needs to be done.

An ever changing scoreline can attract the audience more.atleast that's my thought.


No offence but have you tried playing and/or watching matches with rally point like i suggested?

[CWB001]

But people know how good football can get so they will enjoy even a 0-0 match.But that is not the case in badminton.Basically if people[general people who do not know much about badminton] get to watch a 'boring' badminton match on TV,they will not say that the match was boring.they will just declare badminton as 'boring'.They have no idea how good badminton can get and how enjoyable it is to watch an interesting match.Something needs to be done.

An ever changing scoreline can attract the audience more.atleast that's my thought.


No offence but have you tried playing and/or watching matches with rally point like i suggested?

Well, now you are comparing apples and pears. You cannot compare knowledgeable football fans with non-badminton fans to show that a continually moving score is better. That is flawed logic.

The answer to your question is "yes". In fact, I'm taking my son to play in an American scoring tournament on Sunday.

So if, when you say "no offence", you mean to imply that if I had seen/played such badminton I would agree with you, then I am afraid you are mistaken.

Regards,

Cliff

[ants]

I have mixed feeling about both. Personally i like the old scoring. But at the same time i'm a person who like changes and challenges, i don't like to be too comfortable. It really depends on how you view on the system.
At the moment i stand undecided.

[Trance]

In my opinion, the change would make too much of a mental change in the game. It would take a lot of time and new training to adjust to the speed of the game in this manner. The pace of the game would also be drastically different. If one player was hitting a bad part of their game, it would probably take a whole set before they may get back on their feet again.

[jerby]

nah, i dont like the fact you can score match-point on anothers serves.
now, when playing it right, you can still win when being down by 9-14.
getting the serves back is a resting point...

I'd vote C: 9x5 normal point.

[DaN_fAn]

Well, now you are comparing apples and pears. You cannot compare knowledgeable football fans with non-badminton fans to show that a continually moving score is better. That is flawed logic.

The answer to your question is "yes". In fact, I'm taking my son to play in an American scoring tournament on Sunday.

So if, when you say "no offence", you mean to imply that if I had seen/played such badminton I would agree with you, then I am afraid you are mistaken.

Regards,

Cliff
well that's your view to the issue and i have aldready stated mine.

If the IBF does change the rules again this time then[if i am right]that will be done only after taking the feedback from the players and not like last time.So if majority of the players along with the IBF members do think the Rally point scoring is better then i say GO for it.

For now we can only wait and see.

[DaN_fAn]

I have mixed feeling about both. Personally i like the old scoring. But at the same time i'm a person who like changes and challenges, i don't like to be too comfortable. It really depends on how you view on the system.
At the moment i stand undecided.
So what did you vote for?At the moment the Old system is what everyone's voting for.
Anyone's shares my idea on rally point scoring?

[CWB001]

If the IBF does change the rules again this time then[if i am right]that will be done only after taking the feedback from the players and not like last time.
For now we can only wait and see.

Have you been consulted, then? I haven't.

What signs are there of a consultation taking place? Bear in mind it needs to be complete by the end of November and there is little time left.

How will they go about it? Will there be a vote?

Or will only a select few professional players be consulted, with the mass of players ignored? If so, is that a valid consultation?

Sadly, I think I know the answer to these questions - and they don't bear out your expectation.

Regards,

Cliff

[ting03]

well maybe most people think that the 21-rally system isn't the best way to count scoring in badminton, but i think we should give it more time before we actually vote. i wound vote 15x3 myself but i've never actually tried to play the 21x3 version so i have no idea whether it's more efficient or not :cool:

well i guess what i'm trying to say is, you'll never know unless you try it first...

so next time i play i'll try to play the 21x3 :D

[DaN_fAn]

Have you been consulted, then? I haven't.

What signs are there of a consultation taking place? Bear in mind it needs to be complete by the end of November and there is little time left.

How will they go about it? Will there be a vote?

Or will only a select few professional players be consulted, with the mass of players ignored? If so, is that a valid consultation?

Sadly, I think I know the answer to these questions - and they don't bear out your expectation.

Regards,

Cliff
Visit this webpage from badminton Association of India's Official Website-
http://badmintonindia.org/bulletin/09/new%20scoring%20system%20menu.htm
Click on 'feedback form of either 11x5 or 21x3 scoring links.As you can see ,That is a feedback form with various important questions asked about the scoring and at the end[after you give your view you need to indicate whether you are a Coach,manager,Player etc.

So i am only guessing that this feedback form is given to all the players/Coaches etc. or maybe the feedback form is not exactly distributed but those who want to express their views can do it and send it to the IBF through their national assocaiations,which is a good idea.

why would i be asked?i am no Pro/Coach.
Are You Any Of The Two?

[DaN_fAn]

well i guess what i'm trying to say is, you'll never know unless you try it first...


That's exactly what i said.You should have tried the Rally point Scoring System first and THEN voted.

Give us your feedback after you have tried.

[CWB001]

why would i be asked?i am no Pro/Coach.Are you any of the two?

Yes. But why should only professional players be consulted? They only represent the very tip of the pyramid. What about everyone else?

Regards,

Cliff

[DaN_fAn]

Yes. But why should only professional players be consulted? They only represent the very tip of the pyramid. What about everyone else?

Regards,

Cliff
So are you a player or a coach?

[CWB001]

So are you a player or a coach?

Coach and administrator, but why is that relevant? Does it somehow enhance my opinions?

And why do you not answer my questions? Why should only professional players and coaches be consulted?

[DaN_fAn]

Coach and administrator, but why is that relevant? Does it somehow enhance my opinions?

And why do you not answer my questions? Why should only professional players and coaches be consulted?
Maybe that's the right way of doing it.Coaches like yourself and Proffesional players are the ones whose advise can be given more weightage and importance.in any case we cant have Everyone giving their feedback to the IBF.that would be a BIG no.

i cannot say much as i am in no way affiliated with the IBF.But i must say that the IBF are atleast taking views and suggestions and not like last time.Much better Scenario this time around.

[CWB001]

Coaches like yourself and Proffesional players are the ones whose advise can be given more weightage and importance.in any case we cant have Everyone giving their feedback to the IBF.


But why are they more weight and importance? Why should only a few chosen elite players be consulted?

[DaN_fAn]

Well atleast it's a start,it's better than nothing.

Getting back to the topic-while playing today with the rally point System i noticed that it tends to put a lot of pressure and excitement while playing on the players.while someone mentioned that players will play more conservatively and there will be longer rallies,i argue saying that there will be the temptation of getting a quick point by hitting a winner.so over all i think the balance will be just right and preserved and if anything the game will only look better.... and in my view the kind of pressure and excitement this scoring creates is just unbeatable.

[Big Slick]

I'm curious, what's your style of play?

Ok, well I wouldn't be the type of player who hits many outright winners from deep in the court. Most of my points would be won by moving my opponent around and getting good angles on the shuttle. I like a fast tempo and generally the longer rallies go on the better things are for me. I think the old system allows you to be very aggressive when you are serving as if you go for a winner and miss the score doesn't change. Hence the old system seems to suit explosive players more. Obviously being able to score on either serve puts more emphasis on consistancy. So I think the new system wouldn't bother me too much.

[fanatico]

service overs are a unique part of badminton! i don't wanna lose it!

[DinkAlot]

service overs are a unique part of badminton! i don't wanna lose it!

Agree; about a week ago my partner and I came back from being down 2-14 and won it 17-16 saving 5 game points. About 3 days ago, my partner and I were down 11-14 and saved 9 game points winning 17-15. :)

With the "ping-pong" scoring, this could have never happened.

[hahahalol]

i personally voted for the new system because i dont have much endurance...and of course people want to play at their best and in some case people want to face their opponent at their best too

[DinkAlot]

i personally voted for the new system because i dont have much endurance...

If you put it this way, maybe I should change my vote to the new system too. ;) :p :D

[Break-My-String]

I think people are forgetting why IBF is looking at changing the scoring system.

Objectives of a new scoring system:

(1) Produce more critical points and hence more exciting matches, thus improving appeal on TV and to spectators

(2) Create new interest in the game

(3) Reduce most match lengths compared to the present system, reducing physical demands (slightly less pressure on players) and reducing TV and potentially spectator session lengths

(4) Offer more opportunities for TV to have commercial and in-depth analysis breaks during a match

Produce a system that spectators find easier to follow

IMHO the bottom line is to attract TV viewers & sponsors. If these changes are the tip of the iceberg that finally creates the $1,000,000 - $15,000,000 purse money, would you still stick to 3x15 point system?

Interms of (3) I would think it would challenge the players more since there are a finite number of serves/rallies...

1) players must play safer shots with longer rallies
2) expend more energy per rally/set

Cheers!

[viver]

Is there any guarantee that changing the scoring format (again :rolleyes: ) will attract more sponsors and viewers?? Changing for the sake of changing, and not at least knowing what to expect just makes it confusing not only to coaches/players who need to adapt to new systems (technically and physically) but also to spectators. There are people still asking for deuce when reaching 13 all in doubles. ;)

I see many people playing badminton with great interest. Most of them book courts weekly on regular basis to play and have their own groups of players. Interestingly enough, many participate in tournaments but never seen them watching any badminton or tournament videos either. Why? If IBF is able to make these people go to watch the tournaments or watch them on TV they would have any reason to complain.

[jerby]

shorter scoring failed before..remeber the world-top Men's double? 10 minutes at most...

and why the f*ck do they want to lower the scoring so that you don't need that much endurance...that's really, really dumb...why not shorten a marathon?

badminton IS exciting, it's shorter, and more explosive than Tennis..it tops almost ALL sports in specatcle..

the problem is not teh game, it's the public..people just don't know what badminton is..and when it's on TV people can't follow it.

there should be more, and more experienced cameramen...not making live shows. but cutting and pasting too make it a spectacle..

[keith_aquino]

I'm voting for the new scoring. It would be easier to would tire my oppnonent in a game. :D Also, I have more time to find weakpoints in my opponent's style.

[DinkAlot]

I'm voting for the new scoring. It would be easier to would tire my oppnonent in a game. :D Also, I have more time to find weakpoints in my opponent's style.

Errrr...how would the new scoring tire out your opponent more/faster? The games would be much faster if every serve scored a point regardless of who's serving.

Am I missing something here? If so, please enlighten, thanks.

[keith_aquino]

The games would be much faster if every serve scored a point regardless of who's serving.

Okay, that one I did not read about. My mistake :o
If that is the case, I'd vote for the old system. At least the sport will be unique among the other racquet sports.

[DinkAlot]

Okay, that one I did not read about. My mistake :o
If that is the case, I'd vote for the old system. At least the sport will be unique among the other racquet sports.

:p No worries Keith. Let's just hope the old system stays. :D

[DaN_fAn]

I remember reading a day or two ago that as far as the experimentation is concerned, Asia will be trying the 21x3 format and European countries have been asked by the IBF to experiment with the 11x5 system.I think these experiments are first to be tested domestically[nationally] before they are tried in Grand Prix tourneys.so i dont think there should be any changes in the scoring for the Denmark Open this month.

As far as India is concerned the 21x3 scoring is aldready being tried in the state and national events.
So has the 11x5 scoring being tried yet in European Nations in the domestic events?Could somebody give the feedback on this?

[doublewings]

Just look at squash, it went from service point to rally point.

Did it produce more critical points - No
Did it create new interest in the game - Can't really see that
Did it reduce most match lengths - Not at the elite level ( of course, squash has 'let', badminton doesn't )
Did it reduce physical demand - Definitely not. Everybody knows this is a joke from those who don't play badminton, at least not seriously. Which sport would want to be labelled as one that doesn't require its players to be at their top form giving out all they have? May be those sitting in the IBF office want to ...
Did it produce a system easier to follow - May be. But most at the club level or play for fun still play service point

[Lio_d]

received yesterday from a french badminton webzine (www.badzine.info):
" Selon l'Agence de Presse Xinhua, dans un communiqué de ce 27 octobre, la Fédération Internationale aurait opté pour un nouveau système de scoring , dès le mois de décembre prochain, et à valoir pour le début de l'année 2006 sur les compétitions internationales.

Article : Raphael Sachetat

Cela pendait au nez du badminton depuis quelques temps. Selon un haut responsable du badminton Chinois cité par l'Agence Officielle Chinoise Xinhua, l'IBF serait donc sur le point d'officialiser le changement de scoring, pour un format en trois sets de 21 points (deux sets gagnants), avec point marqué quelque soit le serveur, et quelque soit la catégorie.

D'après les calculs de l'IBF sur les statistiques menées jusqu'à présent, cela réduirait le temps de match en moyenne d'environ un tiers.

Reste à attendre l'annonce officielle émanant de l'IBF pour ce changement de scoring, qui devrait, dans la foulée, impliquer un changement vraisemblable en France.

Badzine se fera l'échos des commentaires des représenants français une fois l'annonce faite de manière officielle."



For those who can't speak french, in short: IBF is probably going to officialize the new scoring system (3x21) :crying:. It should be done for next december, and applied in international events in 2006.

[terry]

For those who can't speak french, in short: IBF is probably going to officialize the new scoring system (3x21) :crying:. It should be done for next december, and applied in international events in 2006.

Its a bad news. I dun think this new systme point will last long.

[sjoe]

shorter scoring failed before..remeber the world-top Men's double? 10 minutes at most...

and why the f*ck do they want to lower the scoring so that you don't need that much endurance...that's really, really dumb...why not shorten a marathon?

badminton IS exciting, it's shorter, and more explosive than Tennis..it tops almost ALL sports in specatcle..

the problem is not teh game, it's the public..people just don't know what badminton is..and when it's on TV people can't follow it.

there should be more, and more experienced cameramen...not making live shows. but cutting and pasting too make it a spectacle..

I absolutely agree with you. Volleyball and Table tennis change for the same reasons since the Olympic 2000 in Sydney. At that time Badminton also to 5x7 points. And still no increase in TV coverages both Volleyball, Tabletennis and Badminton.
If anything, it should be 1 to 30 points with no setting and normal service rules, change over at 15 points, game will only to 21 if opponent can't get more than 10 points.

[dpc1l]

I like the old system better - I think it is an easier system for a player to stage a comeback, which I think makes good viewing.

Slightly off topic here:
I agree with the point someone made earlier that to increase TV coverage, the filming needs to be addressed. Tennis matches look much more exciting on TV than badminton matches, but in real life, they're both exciting to watch. It's very difficult for non-badminton players to get a sense the speed and agility involved from filmed badminton matches - the courts look small and easy to cover, and smashes don't seem that impressive.

[cooler]

UPDATED: 07:52, October 27, 2005
New scoring system to debut at Badminton World Cup 2005

The International Badminton Federation (IBF) will apply the new scoring system in the Badminton World Cup 2005 to be held in December at Yiyang, central China's Hunan Province.

The new scoring system will come into effect in the World Cup, to be held from December 15-18, and will be applied to all the other international events starting from next year, China's State General Administration of Sport said at a press conference here on Wednesday.

"The new rules will make matches faster and would also cut the duration of tournaments," said Liu Fengyan, director of the administration's Table Tennis & Badminton Administrative Center.

Under the new system, each rally will be awarded a point, while the current system awards one point only to the serving player who wins a rally.

The new rules also adopts a format of best-of-three games and a 21-point system for all the events. Currently, a winner is decided after 15 points for men's singles, men's and women's doubles and mixed doubles with 11 points for women's singles.

"According to the IBF statistics, the new rules will shorten the duraton of the games by one third of time,"said Liu.

The World Cup, with a total prizemoney of 250,000 US dollars on offer this year, will feature players ranked among the top 16 for men's singles, top 12 for women's singles, top eight for men's doubles and top six for both women's doubles and mixed doubles.

Source: Xinhua

[CWB001]

UPDATED: 07:52, October 27, 2005

The new scoring system will come into effect in the World Cup, to be held from December 15-18, and will be applied to all the other international events starting from next year, China's State General Administration of Sport said at a press conference here on Wednesday.

"The new rules will make matches faster and would also cut the duration of tournaments," said Liu Fengyan, director of the administration's Table Tennis & Badminton Administrative Center.


Source: Xinhua

What has this got to do with the China State General Administration of Sport? They do not control badminton - or do they?

[GunBlade008]

I don't think I can adapt to this new style of play. Serving is supposed to be sacred!(If you catch my drift) :p

[cooler]

What has this got to do with the China State General Administration of Sport? They do not control badminton - or do they?

the article about implementing the new scoring system at the 2005 world cup

[CWB001]

the article about implementing the new scoring system at the 2005 world cup

Er, yes. :rolleyes:

That article says that China's State General Administration of Sport is announcing the change.

The question is why is that organisation laying down the new law - why not the IBF?

[cooler]

Er, yes. :rolleyes:

That article says that China's State General Administration of Sport is announcing the change.

The question is why is that organisation laying down the new law - why not the IBF?

please re-read the first sentence of the first paragraph of that article.

[Boy@n]

I think the main reason for this change is because of easier "prediction" of game duration... Much easier for TV stations to make programm schedules.

This happened the same in volleyball. In volleyball most of players were against this change, but now most say it's better. Game is more exciting, more dynamic, more adrenaline, because you have to be focused all the time at your max, with losing just the serve it allowed one to get bit "lazy" sometimes....

The reason I think this is better, it's that EVERY point is equally important, and thus every rally should be awarded with a point if won.

[ViningWolff]

I really don't care what the point system is... arguments can be made for both sides.

I've been poking around the internet to get some clarification ont he srve rules for the new 3 x 21 with not a lot of success.

I understand rally point, however, regarding the serve - as those here undetsand it, will it simply be whoever scored the last point gets/retains serve?

I feel rally point will put a lot of pressure on the server now. I'll probably test the new system out the next week or two as practice.

[other]

I feel rally point will put a lot of pressure on the server now. I'll probably test the new system out the next week or two as practice.

indeed 1 hit can let the opponents gain 1 point....lots of pressure on the server..maybe we will be seeing more flick serves:confused:

[cxytdn]

I really don't care what the point system is... arguments can be made for both sides.

I've been poking around the internet to get some clarification ont he srve rules for the new 3 x 21 with not a lot of success.

I understand rally point, however, regarding the serve - as those here undetsand it, will it simply be whoever scored the last point gets/retains serve?

I feel rally point will put a lot of pressure on the server now. I'll probably test the new system out the next week or two as practice.
like volleyball.....

[ViningWolff]

Trying to make sense of the new scoring in doubles was interesting to say the least


We've come to the conclusion that it made most sense that players simply stay in their service side - it is brutal to try and keep track if you have to move with each point. Dunno if any of you have tried it, but it's nightmare.

My opponent is serving to me on the even side. He serves short, so we get the point. Me and my partner so I'm on the odd side - and I get to receive serve again? Huh?

I dunno, the singles made sense - the doubles could be a gong show.

Anyone else?

[m_poppema]

:mad:

Sorry, I'm just sooo mad....why change our beloved sport :crying::crying:

[cooler]

Chinese badminton coach criticizes new scoring rules



A Chinese coach has expressed concern that the new scoring system to be adopted by the International Badminton Federation (IBF) would make the doubles events less spectacular.

"The change is designed to shorten the duration of the game so as to be friendly to the live broadcast, but it will bear great influence on the game, especially the doubles, "Li Yongbo, head coach of the Chinese national team, was quoted as saying on Monday's China Sports Daily.

"The new rules would undermine the beauty of the doubles competition. It is unwise for the IBF to adopt the changes without adequate evaluation beforehand."

Under the new system, each rally will be awarded a point, while the current system awards one point only to the serving player who wins a rally.

The news rules also adopt a format of best-of-three games and a 21-point system for all the events. Currently, a winner is decided after 15 points for men's singles, men's and women's doubles and mixed doubles with 11 points for women's singles.

However, Li showed confidence in his squad to well adapt to the new rules which will come into effect at the World Cup to be held in China next month.

"Despite the new rules, China will keep their leading position in world badminton," he said.

Source: Xinhua

[DinkAlot]

Trying to make sense of the new scoring in doubles was interesting to say the least

Tried it for 5-10 minutes a few weeks back and we all agreed:

Unless the IBF comes full force with the National Guard, we ain't changin'.

[jkad65]

The thing I like about the old scoring system is, given the score at any time, it's easy to keep track of who is supposed to receive in what court and who is supposed to serve from what court. Its not so intuitive in the new system methinks.

[DinkAlot]

The thing I like about the old scoring system is, given the score at any time, it's easy to keep track of who is supposed to receive in what court and who is supposed to serve from what court. Its not so intuitive in the new system methinks.

Yep, that's a big advantage. Also, when you are serving, you have the ability to "go for more", be more aggressive with shots and know you won't be giving up any points going for them. With the new system, you have to play extra conservative on every point because no matter what, someone will score a point on every serve, regardless who serves. It'll be impossible to see those 5-13 comebacks.

[cooler]

Yep, that's a big advantage. Also, when you are serving, you have the ability to "go for more", be more aggressive with shots and know you won't be giving up any points going for them. With the new system, you have to play extra conservative on every point because no matter what, someone will score a point on every serve, regardless who serves. It'll be impossible to see those 5-13 comebacks.

yes, there would be less risk taking and less variety of shots under the new rally point system.

[DinkAlot]

yes, there would be less risk taking and less variety of shots under the new rally point system.

Boo-hoo. :( :crying: :crying: :crying:

[gsi4ever]

I think that old system is better.

[event]

UPDATED: 07:52, October 27, 2005
New scoring system to debut at Badminton World Cup 2005

The International Badminton Federation (IBF) will apply the new scoring system in the Badminton World Cup 2005 to be held in December at Yiyang, central China's Hunan Province. This article (http://www.badmintontimes.com/article/articleRead.jsp?menunum=2&no=1929) says that the rally point system will be done on a test basis at the Korean Nationals from November 29-Dec 2. It says it will get an international testing at the Asia Under-16s in Macau on December 3rd and 4th.

The nationals will be held in my home gym so I'll be watching Kim Dong-moon and Ra Kyung-min (they're still playing domestically but they never played together) and Lee Hyo-jung, Lee Kyung-won, Lee Jae-jin and all the rest flounder around with this assinine new scoring system.

[wedgewenis]

the IBF is trying to follow the infinite wisdom of Vollyball organizations who changed to Rally point

if i'm not correct ... rallypoint has done *nothing to increase interest in That sports popularity ... i know it hasn't increased my interest in watching vollyball, quite honestly I preferred it much better before they changed it ... speaking purely as a non-fan of vollyball, someone who never enjoyed playing it myself and only watched it perhaps durring a commonwealth or olympics for a short time...... I liked it better before, even to the point of finding the scoring annoying to watch... and it certainly hasn't increased the intensity of play or length of the rallies in my view.

as far as I know the amount of vollyball tv coverage (atleast in north america) has increased 0% in the last several years since the change... the only Time i've ever been able to catch it on tv is still during an event such as commonwealth or olmypics... and perhaps an olympic qualifying event months before the olympics where a canadian team may be playing.


11x5 sounds better than 21x3 .... i'm so glad Canada hasn't officially adopted this scoring.... and in my province its not going to go either. With the power of the internet mabye the voice of the players will be heard - if only the IBF is willing to listen..... its obvious that most players are going to reject this crap. but whether the IBF even cares about its players (rather than money and pleasing tv sponsors) that is yet to be seen.

[cooler]

the IBF is trying to follow the infinite wisdom of Vollyball organizations who changed to Rally point

if i'm not correct ... rallypoint has done *nothing to increase interest in That sports popularity ... i know it hasn't increased my interest in watching vollyball, quite honestly I preferred it much better before they changed it ... speaking purely as a non-fan of vollyball, someone who never enjoyed playing it myself and only watched it perhaps durring a commonwealth or olympics for a short time...... I liked it better before, even to the point of finding the scoring annoying to watch... and it certainly hasn't increased the intensity of play or length of the rallies in my view.

as far as I know the amount of vollyball tv coverage (atleast in north america) has increased 0% in the last several years since the change... the only Time i've ever been able to catch it on tv is still during an event such as commonwealth or olmypics... and perhaps an olympic qualifying event months before the olympics where a canadian team may be playing.


11x5 sounds better than 21x3 .... i'm so glad Canada hasn't officially adopted this scoring.... and in my province its not going to go either. With the power of the internet mabye the voice of the players will be heard - if only the IBF is willing to listen..... its obvious that most players are going to reject this crap. but whether the IBF even cares about its players (rather than money and pleasing tv sponsors) that is yet to be seen.
good example.
Seeing example from the volleyball provided clear evidence that changing badminton score system to rally points will add nothing to badminton popularity, only to add confusion to regular badminton fans and players. Ping pong and tennis use rally point system from day 1, it has nothing to do with their scoring system since ping pong is not popular but tennis is in the USA.

[event]

good example.
Seeing example from the volleyball provided clear evidence that changing badminton score system to rally points will add nothing to badminton popularity, only to add confusion to regular badminton fans and players. Ping pong and tennis use rally point system from day 1, it has nothing to do with their scoring system since ping pong is not popular but tennis is in the USA.With tennis and ping pong the rally-point system has likely always been a non-issue because the server has an advantage in the former and has probably an equal chance at winning the rally in the latter. In volleyball, I can see why they might have changed it because at high levels, even with the spike serve (which, if I'm not mistaken, was introduced before the scoring change) it was nearly impossible to deny the receiving team the first chance to attack. Also the first hit in volleyball has to end a higher percentage of rallies than does the service return in badminton or even the first smash. I don't remember watching too much volleyball in those days, but I can imagine there must have been a lot more stalemates, with no one able to increase their score, than we get in badminton. In other words, they might have had more reason to change in volleyball but, as you both point out, the change still didn't do anything for TV coverage. The IBF has to face the fact that scoring systems aren't the reason for a game's popularity. It depends on the action, the personalities involved, sometimes on the nationalities of the players relative to the spectators, and on the opportunities that people have to watch the thing in the first place.

[TheGr8Two]

I am definitely against the rally point system. It does not create any more interest because no matter what, badminton is just hitting shuttles back and off. Most spectators are badminton players themselves, and I don't see how the change will make non-badminton players suddenly have the urge to watch badminton. If we really want better TV coverage, we have to speak up to the cable companies that we demand badminton. We should explain why we find badminton so appealing. It's certainly no less attractive then say tennis, basketball. What we really need is funding for prizes for tournaments. Badminton certainly deserves as much prestige, if not more, than say "sports" like golf.

[VegiSmash]

I think all of us, at least those who are paid up members of constituent national organizations, such as USAB in my case, should petition them not to make any decisions in support or opposed to any new scoring system without consulting us. The larger playing public should have a say in it rather than officials of national bodies making such a decision. FYI, I am opposed to any changes as most of you are.
If BC circulates such a petition, I would be happy to sign it. I believe the official to address this in USAB is Cliff Peters. I am going to go ahead and write him a letter, but I would encourage BC to draft and circulate a petition for US. I hope other nationals take up something similar.
I am sorry if this is a repeat of someone else's posting, I did not read all of them. Thanks.

[SibugiChai]

I think all of the top guys in IBF should be sack. Their head is twisted, keep changing the scoring method wont help much in promoting the game. If there is any improvement of promotion it will be marginal. The should learn from the american, the best way to promote it is "MARKETING"... put more effort into marketing rather than thinking a new scoring system.

Is disneyland really that FUN,,, NO!! is all marketing..

[DinkAlot]

Is disneyland really that FUN,,, NO!! is all marketing..

No way! Disneyland is that fun! :p :D :D :D :D :D

[TrunkZ69]

Old for sure, i think it makes for more interesting games.

[bluejeff]

The new rule is OK for singles, but for doubles, it's very painful. People will be confused on whose turn it is for serving and which side to serve from. I just hope IBF can make some more changes and make it simpler.

[Dave18]

I say old system but the new system would be pretty cool like ping pong. Fast and simple.

Or even 11x5 like ping pong would be fun. I can't believe they aired ping pong on sportsnet central. I was surprised. Lol.

[SibugiChai]

bill gates favourites sports is ping pong.. i even saw him attending the atlanta96 ping pong tourny alone? wonder where is his bodyguard? but around him got no spectator????? :confused:

[wedgewenis]

i think this new system is Idiotic at best ... i'm actually quite disgusted with this at the moment.... :mad:

can anyone get some more polls going on this new scorring?

not here! but perhaps in a bigger forum? .. or format where more poeple could voice thier oppinion so that we can send a message to the IBF


perhaps on http://www.petitiononline.com/

mabye someoen can start a petition to tell IBF to return to old scoring and send this petition to all badminton sites to get ppl to voice thier say.

[event]

The new rule is OK for singles, but for doubles, it's very painful. People will be confused on whose turn it is for serving and which side to serve from. I just hope IBF can make some more changes and make it simpler.Well, I watched my first tournament with the new system. Pretty dull. If you do get extra points, it's exciting because you have to go up by two. The trouble is that in doubles, the server is so vulnerable that the game seems to be always won by a receiving side. I gave up on trying to follow the serving order.

Maybe it was because it was a domestic tournament with seasoned international veterans against high-level kids, basically, but too often, as soon as the score reached 18 or 19, the game just seemed over. For someone to hold serve 5 times in a row after being behind for most of the game, it was nearly impossible. The only games in extra points were the ones where the two teams were neck and neck the whole time. With the old system, a losing pair could always count on their ability to kill an opponent's game-point serve and then fight back.

On a side note, I didn't end up seeing Yoo, Ra, Ha, or Kim in action. Ra and Ha were there watching but the only international retiree who played this tournament was Lee Dong-soo and he and Im Bang-eun were elimated in the QF and he and Jung Jae-heui went out in the semis. Lee Jae-jin and Jung Jae-sung were reunited for the men's doubles event but lost in the semis to Jung's new partner, Han Sang-hoon.

[kwun]

i am still wondering what is the proper serving ordering for doubles. anybody can shed light on this? as mentioned, it seems rather confusing who's supposed to serve, and how players are supposed to stand.

and who says this is supposed to make badminton simpler? we are confused even before we started.

anyway, we want to try it out and understand the new scoring system first hand. if i am planning to diss something, i must at least try it out to know what is so bad about it... ;)

[DinkAlot]

i am still wondering what is the proper serving ordering for doubles.

We tried it about 2 months ago and in 5 minutes lost track and went back to the current system of scoring. Then tried again in another match and lost track in 2 minutes. :p

[FEND.]

The more changes they try to implement, the more people will think that this is a poofter's sport since they have major rules changes almost every other year.

[seven]

Has anyone noticed that the poll gives more and more people against the new :mad::mad::mad: scoring system?

Seems that we are getting nearly unanimous against it now! :rolleyes:

[DinkAlot]

Has anyone noticed that the poll gives more and more people against the new :mad::mad::mad: scoring system?

Seems that we are getting nearly unanimous against it now! :rolleyes:


Errrrrrr...that's why it's called a "poll". People have free will to vote.

Long live the old scoring. :D :D :D

[seven]

Errrrrrr...that's why it's called a "poll". People have free will to vote.

Long live the old scoring. :D :D :D

Yes, what I mean is that people are more and more unanimous against the "3x21 rally scoring" (should soon reach 86% against it).
Why doesn't IBF listen to its fans base? :mad::mad::mad:

[seven]

On this topic, does anyone know when IBF will take its OFFICIAL decision?
I saw that the host for 2009 WC has just been decided, so I suppose the decision is imminent... (if not already taken)

I really hope they will abandon this silly idea, but I am rather pessimistic... :(

[DinkAlot]

Yes, what I mean is that people are more and more unanimous against the "3x21 rally scoring" (should soon reach 86% against it).
Why doesn't IBF listen to its fans base? :mad::mad::mad:

"More and more unanimous" is a bad choice of words. :p But yes, most Badders prefer the old system and hopefully the IBF will listen. :)

[seven]

"More and more unanimous" is a bad choice of words. :p But yes, most Badders prefer the old system and hopefully the IBF will listen. :)

Let's say closer and closer to being unanimous! ;)
Is this better? :p

[DinkAlot]

Let's say closer and closer to being unanimous! ;)
Is this better? :p

No, because "unanimous" means every one is in accord and that will never happen. :p

[seven]

No, because "unanimous" means every one is in accord and that will never happen. :p

yes I know what unanimous means :rolleyes:
99% is not unanimous, it is "very close" to unanimous.

Obviously, we can't be unanimous as there are at least one or two persons (who said idiots? ;) ) at IBF who defend this crap :mad::mad::mad: scoring system!

[cooler]

Indonesia demands new badminton scoring system

The Indonesian Badminton Association (PBSI) demands that the current 3x15 scoring system be changed into the 3x21 system that is more television-friendly, an official disclosed Thursday.

According to Gandhi Sulistyanto, head of PBSI foreign affairs division, the new system is more suitable to TV coverage and will make badminton more popular.

"But we must wait decisions by PBSI regional chapters," Gandhi told Xinhua in a written statement.

The proposed 3x21 scoring system adopts rally point while the current scoring system allows only the serving side to add point.

PBSI's official stance will be submitted to the Asian Badminton Confederation (ABC)'s meeting in Kuala Lumpur this weekend.

The International Badminton Federation (IBF) implemented a 5x7 scoring system in August 2002 but the trial period was short-lived and replaced by the old 3x15 system.

Source: Xinhua

[Lio_d]

On this topic, does anyone know when IBF will take its OFFICIAL decision?
I saw that the host for 2009 WC has just been decided, so I suppose the decision is imminent... (if not already taken)

I really hope they will abandon this silly idea, but I am rather pessimistic... :(

The decision is now official, see http://www.badzine.info/news.asp?id=708 , or http://www.ffba.org/home/actualite.php3?act=lire&id=960 :

--> All matches from official IBF events between 1 feb and 15 may will be played in 3x21. The defivitive decision weel be taken on 15 may 2006.

[DinkAlot]

The decision is now official, see http://www.badzine.info/news.asp?id=708 , or http://www.ffba.org/home/actualite.php3?act=lire&id=960 :

--> All matches from official IBF events between 1 feb and 15 may will be played in 3x21. The defivitive decision weel be taken on 15 may 2006.


Booooo hoooooo! :( :crying: :( :( :(

[cooler]

BADMINTON: IBF to try out new scoring system
K.M. Boopathy

Dec 10:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

THE International Badminton Federation (IBF), in an effort to make the sport marketable and popular worldwide, will experiment with a new scoring system for the second time in three years to replace the existing 15-point system.
The new system, which will come into being next year, will use the best of three 21-point system using the point-per-rally format and will be introduced at all the grand prix events and other tournaments beginning Feb 1.

It will be experimented until the Thomas Cup finals in Tokyo in May.

IBF had put the seven-point system (best of five games) on trial between May 2002 and April 2003 but had to revert to the 15-point system after the seven-point system it was strongly opposed by the majority of the affiliates.

The effectiveness of the system will be reviewed during the Annual General Meeting (AGM) in Tokyo and will replace the traditional 15-point system (best-of-three) if IBF’s affiliates vote in favour of the 21-point system.

IBF events committee chairman Paisarn Rangsikitpo said that the 21-point system will be shorter, more interesting and will also be very competitive due to the point-per-rally format.

"We need to make necessary changes in order to see badminton one of the most popular sports globally and the 21-point system will make it very interesting and improve marketability," said Paisarn after the IBF council meeting in Kuala Lumpur yesterday.

Unlike the old scoring system where 11 points over best of three games is used in the women’s singles, the 21-point version will be standard in all five events, including the men’s and women’s singles, and doubles and the mixed doubles.

If the score of a game is tied at 20-20, a player or pair must gain two clear points to win and if the score reaches 29-29, the first to score 30 will win the game.

A 60-second interval will be allowed when a player or pair reaches 11 points and in the third game, the players are required to change ends when when a player or pair reach 11 points.

In the doubles, only one service will be used instead of as in the two in the 15-point system and the players will serve on a rotation basis.

Paisarn is also optimistic that the system can convince affiliates as shorter matches reduces the risk of injuries and promises longer careers for players

[viver]

yes I know what unanimous means :rolleyes:
99% is not unanimous, it is "very close" to unanimous.

Obviously, we can't be unanimous as there are at least one or two persons (who said idiots? ;) ) at IBF who defend this crap :mad::mad::mad: scoring system!

Another stupid change. Since they change to this way, might as well the rally loser get the serve. At least, give the rally winner the advantage of being the receiver and continue with the attack. :mad::crying::mad:

[terry]

OMG!!! how can a traditional scoring format just change like that?:crying: :crying:

[Double_Player]

since we have all these discussions revolving around IBF, new scoring system, popularity, etc etc. Does BF/BC has any influence in IBF? Any of the members work for IBF/have "a say" in the decision making?

IF we sign a petition/online petition to IBF to keep badminton just as it is right now, will it work? will they even consider it? I'm pretty sure some one could organize an online petition or even a real one to keep badminton as it is.

This may help since the new scoring system will be on trial for a litle while. If some one make this online petition. sticky the thread so we can sign on it.

[taneepak]

I think the proposed new scoring system deserves a chance. Let it be tested out. Neither you nor anyone are 100% certain that it will be detrimental to the game. The new system has a point in allowing a point to be awarded for a rally won irrespective who the server is. After all it doesn't really make sense that you cannot even get a point for a rally won but merely the right to serve when your opponent is serving, under the current system. Let us have an open mind. The game of badminton is evolving. It is not cast in stone. IBF officials at least have the guts to opt for change which they think is for the better. What is wrong with that?
If our poll shows we are against the proposed new system and if the new system turns out to be a real hit, then we would look foolish, wouldn't we? Maybe that is why we are what we are and the IBF officials are what they are, the former mere back-seat drivers and the latter selected because they are movers and shakers.

[2wheels04]

i am still wondering what is the proper serving ordering for doubles. anybody can shed light on this? as mentioned, it seems rather confusing who's supposed to serve, and how players are supposed to stand.<snip>

The new rule is OK for singles, but for doubles, it's very painful. People will be confused on whose turn it is for serving and which side to serve from. <snip>

Fellas, fellas, change is difficult at first, time the great healer.
The doubles serving ritual defined in IBF Laws in practical sense is:


There is only one service per side.
When the score is EVEN, the serve is from the RIGHT service court.
When the score is ODD, serve is from the LEFT service court.


You reckon, there is the fellow in the high chair to ask questions. It is your right to ask, and the ump's duty to clarify to you.
The legalese given below for reference only.

11.4 Serving
In any game, the right to serve shall pass consecutively:


11.4.1 from the initial server who started the game from the right service court

11.4.2 to the partner of the initial receiver. The service shall be delivered from the left service court.

11.4.3 to the player of the initial serving side standing in the service court corresponding to that side’s score. (Law 11.1)

11.4.4 to the player of the initial receiving side standing in the service court corresponding to that side’s score (Law 11.1) and so on.

Hope this helps. Thanks for trying the rally points objectively!

[wedgewenis]

My view is that this is a rediculous attempt by the IBF for all the reasons stated... most of these reasons havn't been addressed by anyone who's voting in favour of the change...this passive 'oh lets wait and see' attitude concerns me too.

Canada is NOT adopting this system ... i hope to god they have sense to keep it that way.

rallypoint is the stupidest thing the ibf has come up with yet


since we have all these discussions revolving around IBF, new scoring system, popularity, etc etc. Does BF/BC has any influence in IBF? Any of the members work for IBF/have "a say" in the decision making?

IF we sign a petition/online petition to IBF to keep badminton just as it is right now, will it work? will they even consider it? I'm pretty sure some one could organize an online petition or even a real one to keep badminton as it is.

This may help since the new scoring system will be on trial for a litle while. If some one make this online petition. sticky the thread so we can sign on it.

YES YES YES - the only question is How many people we can get to sign this bad boy and does the IBF even care what the non-pro Badminton Fan/Player wants?

I say bring on the petitions - FIGHT THE POWER !

[wedgewenis]

Sorry to double post ... not sure how that happend:



Just a draft. I havn't checked spelling

tell me if i'm missing anything,




Our Petition to have the IBF reject 21x3 (Rallypoint) scoring in Professional and Non-Pro Badminton


This Petition is posted on behalf of www.badmintoncentral.com but we wish to extend our appreciation to any other individuals (or members of any other badminton website or forumboard) that wish to join our cause

As badminton players and Fans we vehemently reject the Idea of the 21x3 rallypoint system in professional and non-professional badminton, for the fallowing reasons.

1. First we believe this change will NOT be positively recieved by players nor fans alike it is easily clear from reactions on the internet from players
of many different countries and skill levels that this is not being positively recieved.

BadmintonCentral has one of the most popular Badminton forums on the net. In a Forum Poll 85% of members chose the Old system This is not only an example of how this change is currently being percieved, but in our view how it will be widely recieved by players worldwide.

We can further validate this point by looking at the mostly negative reaction to the attempted (5x7) change. That change was far less drastic than rallypoint yet was widely rejected.

2. We do not believe this change will positively affect the games perception or popularity among fans or players

we strongly believe this will only cause confusion and discord among most players (as to which scoring system is appropriate for local clubs, Tournaments and national events etc. In a sport that already lacks unity among players this is not a positive step.

3. We believe this change to rallypoint will drastically decrease the chances of a player making a significant come-back; at any level of play and we contend this will degrade the level of drama and our own enjoyment of Watching and playing Badminton.

4. We do not believe this change will positively affect our own enjoyment of playing the game.

- First we contend that rallypoint will make the game far more difficult and even frustrating to keep score,
especially in doubles.
- Second, we contend ralypoint will decrease the level of challenge of the average game by making the duration shorter. We believe duration is important to the difficulty and challenge of badminton as well ad the perception of badminton as a difficult sport. As an example we can see that Tennis matches can go for over 4 hours, yet the average Badminton match (for singles ex: is about 49 minutes with 2 games and around 1hr 20 mins with 3 games) With Tennis matches exceeding such Times we also find it hypocrytical that Badminton's match durations be shortened.

- 3rd, we do not believe rallypoint is a fair means of scoring as it only benefits 'Fast Starters'. By creating a scoring system
that suites only certain players we think this would not be a fair means of scoring overall.

5. As both players and fans, we wish to show our disproval with even the possibility of this change to rallypoint and strongly hope the IBF will consider overturning this ruling. We believe there are many ways badminton's popularity and TV coverage can be increased that are not being
looked into by the IBF. We also know that there are far more reasonable means of allowing for commercial breaks and apeasing TV sponsors in general that are Not being considered by the IBF.

[taneepak]

Sorry to double post ... not sure how that happend:



Just a draft. I havn't checked spelling

tell me if i'm missing anything,

I, for one, do not agree with your proposal to petition the IBF on everyone's behalf. It would be better for each forum member who is aggrieved by the new system to fight his own battle. Let the proposed scoring system be tried out first. Then and only then can we be in a better position to pass judgement.

[DinkAlot]

I, for one, do not agree with your proposal to petition the IBF on everyone's behalf. It would be better for each forum member who is aggrieved by the new system to fight his own battle. Let the proposed scoring system be tried out first. Then and only then can we be in a better position to pass judgement.

Agree, I think we should just wait and see if this new scoring actually becomes etched in stone (which I highly doubt). I know locally, the change would not occur until much later, if at all.

[event]

I, for one, do not agree with your proposal to petition the IBF on everyone's behalf. This seems like an oxymoron to me. A petition is a document that only carries the weight of the people who sign it and the number thereof. In other words, a petition is presented on behalf of only those who sign it. If only 80% of BCers are in favour then only those 80% will sign.
It would be better for each forum member who is aggrieved by the new system to fight his own battle.This, of course, is nonsense. The whole point of collective action is to accomplish something together that one can't do alone. If anything, those who feel most strongly about it can elect to write their own letters in addition to the petition. There is no reason why a collective opinion should not also be expressed.
Let the proposed scoring system be tried out first. Then and only then can we be in a better position to pass judgement.You may have a point in suggesting that we not tell them what we think and then try it out...in that order. I, for one, have already tried out the new system from the point of view of a spectator and I don't like it. The impossibility of comebacks is a real downer. The IBF claims to be giving it a trial run. Some decision-making bodies basically ram decisions through and only have trial periods in the runup to a preordained rubber-stamping. The IBF, though, may have proven its willingness to act on good faith when they scrapped that 7-point madness a few years ago.

[tonyglandille]

Hi,

I'm french and new at Badmintoncentral but I will give you the experience I saw in France. France National Team has experience this system with the Deutch National Team and for what I see is that all the game has a maximum time of 40mn for 3 sets.
Each set duration is above 10~15 minutes.
And the other point is that this system are really benefit for player who has less stamina (maybe Peter Gade can win Lin Dan with it).

Some player has told that this system is really disturbing and does not push the player to take risky shot now that even if you serve your are not in security.

I think effectively for what I saw that this system deserve badminton. Has many people say, we like the physical challenge in badminton and with this system this is lost!

[seven]

I am with event and wedgewenis on this one.
Those who don't want to sign the petition don't have to do it.

Once we have the definitive petition, I can translate it into french as I think many french players/fans are ready to sign it too.

[taneepak]

The forum has more than 11,000 members. Wouldn't it be more proper that at least 50% of the members are in agreement re the petition before we can claim in the petition that we are representing the BF? If you must petition then I think it is fairer if you were to state in the petition that we are XX number of players/members out of a total of 11,000 plus players/members, instead of claiming that you are petitioning on behalf of the BF.

[event]

The forum has more than 11,000 members. Wouldn't it be more proper that at least 50% of the members are in agreement re the petition before we can claim in the petition that we are representing the BF? If you must petition then I think it is fairer if you were to state in the petition that we are XX number of players/members out of a total of 11,000 plus players/members, instead of claiming that you are petitioning on behalf of the BF.Those are valid points. The wording can certainly be altered. wedgewenis posted that as a draught. You are right in that a petition represents the views of only the people who sign it and so what would be the point of wording it such that it sounds as if it represents the views of 11,000 people who may or may not have signed it. I think it could still mention the vote and the percentages as well as the number of people who voted. But if you draw up a petition that claims to represent the collective viewpoint of an organization 11,000 strong and only a few hundred sign it, then it serves only to mislead some and to convince the others that it's just hot air.

[DinkAlot]

Those are valid points. The wording can certainly be altered. wedgewenis posted that as a draught. You are right in that a petition represents the views of only the people who sign it and so what would be the point of wording it such that it sounds as if it represents the views of 11,000 people who may or may not have signed it. I think it could still mention the vote and the percentages as well as the number of people who voted. But if you draw up a petition that claims to represent the collective viewpoint of an organization 11,000 strong and only a few hundred sign it, then it serves only to mislead some and to convince the others that it's just hot air.

How about a simple:

"Dear IBF,

Please bring back the old scoring.

Sincerely,
11,000 signatures."

:p

[taneepak]

Have you ever considered that the new scoring system could have been the collective proposal from the major national badminton associations? Without their input or blessing do you think the new system would even get off the ground? National badminton associations are more representative of their country's views and opinions than any of us. Are we punching above our weight? Personal opinions, yes, but to punch way above our weight, no.

[event]

Have you ever considered that the new scoring system could have been the collective proposal from the major national badminton associations? Without their input or blessing do you think the new system would even get off the ground? National badminton associations are more representative of their country's views and opinions than any of us. Are we punching above our weight? Personal opinions, yes, but to punch way above our weight, no.Do you think Punch Gunalan had the blessing of major national badminton associations when he proposed that women players wear sexy clothes? The IOC gets money from TV networks when they award coverage rights to the Olympics. I'm sure the IBF works the same way. This measure has been proposed under the pretense of making badminton more marketable to TV audiences. They have been unequivocal about that. The two effects of larger TV audiences are money and popularity. That's what they are hoping for. If this measure accomplishes that, then the IBF will be happy when the money comes in. National associations will get a piece of that pie for TV rights within their countries so they will support it if they think it will work.

Just where do you get this idea about the representativeness of national associations? Members of national badminton associations do not stand for elections on platforms relating to point systems, etc. Nor are they delegated from local groups of players to represent collective views at the national level. They may make guesses about their compatriots' wishes but they are not elected representatives. Did anyone from the Hong Kong association contact you and ask you for your views before giving this notional okay to the IBF? Did they contact anyone you know? KBA didn't contact me. There is no poll on their website in the aftermath of the trial of the new system at the nationals. This forum is as good a place as any to gauge rank-and-file player/fans' opinions on a new system. Our opinions count. We are the ones who play and watch the matches. We theoretically buy the products that are advertised during commercial breaks. If a forum like this of 11,000 members is the only one that has come up with a way to poll constituents, then it needs to be used.

Having said all that, the voices of people who have no experience with a new system are not very persuasive. On the other hand, we don't have that much less experience than the people at the IBF. They made a decision without knowing what the resultant matches would look like. We have a right to oppose that decision without knowing what the resultant matches will look like. People who make decisions based on money only reverse those decisions when the money doesn't flow in. Since we are consumers, maybe our dissatisfaction means something. Or since so many of us are addicts and will watch anyway no matter how lame they make it in the name of attracting TV contract offers, maybe our squawking will be ignored. I mean the whole point of getting it on TV is to attract audiences who aren't currently watching badminton...

[terry]

Yeah !!...Yeah !!...Yeah !!...


How about a simple:

"Dear IBF,

Please bring back the old scoring.

Sincerely,
11,000 signatures."

:p

[seven]

Have you ever considered that the new scoring system could have been the collective proposal from the major national badminton associations? Without their input or blessing do you think the new system would even get off the ground? National badminton associations are more representative of their country's views and opinions than any of us. Are we punching above our weight? Personal opinions, yes, but to punch way above our weight, no.

I can assure you for sure that national badminton associations have NOT been asked anything!!
This decision was unilaterally imposed by IBF.

[seven]

To be precise, the position of BFers is currently 215 against and 35 in favour of the new scoring system => 86% against

I think the petition shouldn't be "on behalf of www.badmintoncentral.com (http://www.badmintoncentral.com/)" but more widely open to all badminton fans in the world.

A petition website would maybe be a good idea.

[taneepak]

To be precise, the position of BFers is currently 215 against and 35 in favour of the new scoring system => 86% against

I think the petition shouldn't be "on behalf of www.badmintoncentral.com (http://www.badmintoncentral.com/)" but more widely open to all badminton fans in the world.

A petition website would maybe be a good idea.


The number 215 will not even appear if you consider the number of badminton players in the world.

[taneepak]

The old scoring system actually does not have a finite end to a set despite its supposedly 15 points. In theory a set can go on for days. A 15 points set could chalk up 500 rallies. Under the new system a 21 point set (max 30) actually means what it says. You can see and appreciate that the winner actually wins 21 points or from 22 to 30 points. You are not confused by a score of 15-0 under the old system when the winner won 515 rallies and the loser wins 500 rallies.
Sometimes things do look different from different angles. :D

[wedgewenis]

This seems like an oxymoron to me. A petition is a document that only carries the weight of the people who sign it and the number thereof. In other words, a petition is presented on behalf of only those who sign it. If only 80% of BCers are in favour then only those 80% will sign.This, of course, is nonsense.

FINE, the petition is posted on behalf of the 86% of BF users (only)...
How bought the 13% make thier own damn petition... i'm really scared, :rolleyes:


I was using this POLL as a reference only - its called a concensus people! ..... since players from alot of different countries participate in this forum we can conclude to some degree atleast people are not happy with the posiblities of this ruling. My conservative guess for this is that 70% of people are Not going to like this change.... I made that guess before I even saw this post... as soon as I heard about it at a local tournament, I was pleased to see the number in this post being over 80 percent; if only in this post.

For me its a matter of Gut feeling, I know this rule change is Idiotic and I know the vast majority of players anywhere are going to feel the same way.

Many people are saying its worth a try, its not - there are far more reasonable ways to improve badminton and suite the needs of TV sponsors or whoever.

[wedgewenis]

taneepak, the good still doesn't outway the bad with 21x3 ..not by a longshot. Tennis has had problems for years gaining popularity for the TV audience... and still isn't huge, but they sure as hell aren't going to sell out to make the game times consistent. (which they are not) one might find that statistically badminton game-times are not really less consistent than any other successful tv sports, perhaps even more consistent. worth looking at?

To be honest I think this whole problem about Time is BS.... let me show some examples:

here are games I've dowloaded off the net that went 2 games (of 3)

wc2003.md.sf.paaske,.rasmussen.v.sang,.zheng.avi Complete Match 40 Mins

Badminton.-.2003.WC.XD.Semi.ChenQQ.ZhaoTT-KimDM.RaKM.mpg Complete Match 55 Mins

Badminton.-.2003.WC.MD.Quarter.ChanCM.ChewCE-SangY.ZhengB.mpg Complete Match 40 Mins

Badminton-2003-WC-MD-QF-Paaske_Rasmussen-Panvisvas_Teerawiwatana_g12.avi Complete 43 Mins

wc2003.ws.f.zhang.v.gong.avi Complete Match 53 Mins

Badminton-2003-WC-XD-Final-Kim_Ra-Zhang_Gao.avi Complete Match 56 Mins

Badminton.-.2004.AE.MS.Semi.Gade-Hidayat.mpg Complete Match 49 Mins

Badminton-2003-WC-MS-SF-XiaXZ-BaoCL-g12.avi Complete Match 49 Mins

Badminton - 2003 Wc Ms Quarter Shonsm-Chenh.mpg Complete Match 49 Mins


I don't see any drastically huge difference in times of these games.... with games that go 3 sets ... they're isn't a huge difference between those either.

21x3 is simply not worth it for what your giving up.

[taneepak]

Let the new system have its trial period. Don't be the judge, jury, and executioner before the poor "fellow" is brought to trial.

[taneepak]

The old scoring system actually does not have a finite end to a set despite its supposedly 15 points. In theory a set can go on for days. A 15 points set could chalk up 500 rallies. Under the new system a 21 point set (max 30) actually means what it says. You can see and appreciate that the winner actually wins 21 points or from 22 to 30 points. You are not confused by a score of 15-0 under the old system when the winner won 515 rallies and the loser wins 500 rallies.
Sometimes things do look different from different angles. :D

I would like to come back to what I said above. Badminton is for all time and will need to have new blood and new players and supporters, long after we disappear from the scene. Do you really think new players and new supporters will really understand and learn to love the old system when the new system is so simple and logical? :D

[Quasimodo]

I would like to come back to what I said above. Badminton is for all time and will need to have new blood and new players and supporters, long after we disappear from the scene. Do you really think new players and new supporters will really understand and learn to love the old system when the new system is so simple and logical? :D

I apologise in advance for jumping in uninvited. I'd just like to point out that the old system's been around for decades and I think we can all agree that more people play badminton more now that 40 or 50 years ago. With the old scoring system. What's changed so suddenly that caused new players to not be able to understand it? After all we all learned it and understood it in quite quick order, didn't we?

I'm not saying either system is easier, more logical, simpler, etc than the other. In fact, that's my point (i.e., that, IMHO, neither system is). It's just a matter of getting used to it. I'm sure had we grown up with rally scoring, we wouldn't have been happy if IBF's switching to a service-based system.

I think the real debate is whether these rule changes as a whole will make badminton a more popular *spectator* sport. And I personally doubt it. Not in North America and specifically in the US, anyway. Simply because there's no history of it here. (Yes, I know about the great Ms. Judy Hashman and her domination in the 1950s. But, even then it wasn't a popular sport in the US.) IOW, it's not ingrained in people's minds. It's got other "problems," but I think most people here simply don't know what it is. If IBF wants to promote the sport, IMHO, they should do just that. Have top players go on tour to promote the sport. Play exhibition matches. Have an exhibition day at major tournaments. Look at MLB, NBA, NFL, MLS with their all-star this and that, home-run derby, slam-dunk contest, etc. Absolutely silly and pointless spectacles, but great for fans and non-fans alike. And excellent for attracting the young ones to the sport. If people become interested, they'll learn the rules of the game. Whatever they are. Very few sports have more complicated, vague, little known twists than baseball and (American) football. But, yet, there're a lot of people watching and playing them. Why? Because they're interested. I highly doubt that by simply changing a few rules would make people to suddenly be interested in badminton. That's like saying, "I've always liked to watch and learn to play badminton, but the rules were simply too complicated. But, now that they've changed it, I will."

[fanatico]

makes sense to me. hope they dont change it

[taneepak]

Well, the real test is yet to come. If there is no change in the belief that "if things ain't broke, why fix it?", we can never really know if our future generations will be better off or be fossilized by us. What "ain't broke" to one can be a death sentence to another. To find out, well, you need to find out.... Finding out means doing something and see if it is better, worse, or if it could open up other opportunities and new ways of looking at the problem. Where is the spirit of inquiry and inquisitiveness? :confused:

[seven]

The number 215 will not even appear if you consider the number of badminton players in the world.

Yes 215 out of 250 responses (in fact 220 out of 255 now... :rolleyes: )
This is a vast majority of above 86% of the replies.
Obviously, neither of us can decide for the millions of badminton fans/players around the world who HAVEN'T replied to this poll.

[seven]

I would like to come back to what I said above. Badminton is for all time and will need to have new blood and new players and supporters, long after we disappear from the scene. Do you really think new players and new supporters will really understand and learn to love the old system when the new system is so simple and logical? :D

There are more and more badminton fans around the world and yes, they do understand the current scoring system as they are not idiots! :mad:
I think the new scoring system is MORE DIFFICULT to understand, especially the part about who serves to who in doubles. It is NOT simple and logical. :rolleyes:

[seven]

Taneepak, there is "mathematical" evidence that the new scoring 1/makes games shorter 2/makes come-backs impossible 3/decreases the suspense at end of games.
Overall, less interest for spectators like us and major change to the game itself with a lot less stamina and mental strength required (more power on the other hand).

[CWB001]

There are more and more badminton fans around the world and yes, they do understand the current scoring system as they are not idiots! :mad:
I think the new scoring system is MORE DIFFICULT to understand, especially the part about who serves to who in doubles. It is NOT simple and logical. :rolleyes:

I agree and, since the IBF has had to explain it using a tabular example on its website, I suspect it does too.

All this talk of fossilised badminton is nonsense. There are some things in life that are self-evident. One of those is that worseminton will not attract new or bigger TV audiences.

[taneepak]

Taneepak, there is "mathematical" evidence that the new scoring 1/makes games shorter 2/makes come-backs impossible 3/decreases the suspense at end of games.
Overall, less interest for spectators like us and major change to the game itself with a lot less stamina and mental strength required (more power on the other hand).

The real test will come. What is more important is that the game become more popular. You have your ideas and the IBF theirs. But the IBF is in the driver's seat. They have access to more resources/inputs re ways to make the game more popular than us. They have an objective to achieve, and an action plan to carry out, which by the way is fool-proof. The action plan is being hedged so there is no risk. If it doesn't work it won't be permanent.

[taneepak]

Yes 215 out of 250 responses (in fact 220 out of 255 now... :rolleyes: )
This is a vast majority of above 86% of the replies.
Obviously, neither of us can decide for the millions of badminton fans/players around the world who HAVEN'T replied to this poll.

220 is puny when you look at the big picture. :)

[CWB001]

The real test will come. What is more important is that the game become more popular. You have your ideas and the IBF theirs. But the IBF is in the driver's seat. They have access to more resources/inputs re ways to make the game more popular than us. They have an objective to achieve, and an action plan to carry out, which by the way is fool-proof. The action plan is being hedged so there is no risk. If it doesn't work it won't be permanent.

Sorry, but it is embarrassing to hear you say that. You must operate on blind faith.

How can you say that the IBF's plan is foolproof? Have you seen it?

How exactly is the action plan hedged so there is no risk?

People here fear that the change is, indeed, permanent because we have seen no success criteria for the experiment. These are required to enable the IBF to take an even-handed judgement over the outcome of the experiment and ought to be published if they really exist.

[taneepak]

Sorry, but it is embarrassing to hear you say that. You must operate on blind faith.

How can you say that the IBF's plan is foolproof? Have you seen it?

How exactly is the action plan hedged so there is no risk?

People here fear that the change is, indeed, permanent because we have seen no success criteria for the experiment. These are required to enable the IBF to take an even-handed judgement over the outcome of the experiment and ought to be published if they really exist.

If the new scoring system is finally approved you can rest assured that it would have received endorsement from the major national badminton associations-Indonesia, I believe is all for it-and the system then becomes permanent. Of course there will be others who will be mad as hell. The hedge is the fallback to the old system should the new system not be adopted. The IBF officials are chosen by member national associations to govern the game. If you think the IBF officials are a bunch of idiots, which I don't think they are, why don't you do something about it? There are things you can do to air your grievances and unhappiness to the IBF. Your 220 signatures petition is one. Or you can take a more serious interest in the affairs of your country's national badminton association and work your way up as an official. Then you can have Punch Gunalan's ears. :D

[CWB001]

If the new scoring system is finally approved you can rest assured that it would have received endorsement from the major national badminton associations-Indonesia, I believe is all for it-and the system then becomes permanent. Of course there will be others who will be mad as hell. The hedge is the fallback to the old system should the new system not be adopted. The IBF officials are chosen by member national associations to govern the game. If you think the IBF officials are a bunch of idiots, which I don't think they are, why don't you do something about it? There are things you can do to air your grievances and unhappiness to the IBF. Your 220 signatures petition is one. Or you can take a more serious interest in the affairs of your country's national badminton association and work your way up as an official. Then you can have Punch Gunalan's ears. :D

You should consider changing your name to Punch's Poodle.

[taneepak]

You should consider changing your name to Punch's Poodle.

This says it all, I suppose. But all is not lost for you. There is a possibilty that the new system will be thrown out, and you can then perk up again. But there is also a possibility that it may not go your way, in which case I can understand your frustration. Either way, I am neutral, basically because the proposed system will be allowed to be tried and tested. To be heard, to be tried, and then to be pronounced one way or another, is the due process I feel strongly about. And all these being initiated by IBF officials speaks volumes for their initiative, instead of being cursed left and right.

[seven]

The IBF officials are chosen by member national associations to govern the game. If you think the IBF officials are a bunch of idiots, which I don't think they are, why don't you do something about it? There are things you can do to air your grievances and unhappiness to the IBF. Your 220 signatures petition is one. Or you can take a more serious interest in the affairs of your country's national badminton association and work your way up as an official. Then you can have Punch Gunalan's ears. :D

Corruption and arrangements inside IBF are a no secret.
Member national associations have very little decision power except for the few dominant asian "super powers". IBF is surely not a "democratic" instance.
If chinese and indonesian fans (for example) can convince their national association to go against this scoring system, it will be abandonned for sure.
If not there is not much hope.

About showing interest in my country's national badminton association... well this is already my case. ;)

[weeyet]

The world cup is being held in china, why don't we just give a chance to the 21-point system ???

[event]

The world cup is being held in china, why don't we just give a chance to the 21-point system ???Great. Just as soon as those TV contracts come pouring in so we can see the d*** thing, we'll give it a chance. The Swiss Open had an idea which was more directly linked to promoting the sport. As I understand, it ended in disaster but it was a good idea in principle. Instead of toying with the scoring to try to make people who couldn't care less about badminton (ie. North Americans) miraculously start to like it enough to devote air time to it, they simply tried giving it air time via live streaming. This so-called trial is happening with a tournament which the Chinese, who get badminton coverage regularly anyway(and whose athletes are so good that all 6 hours of finals under the old system were of interest to spectators anyway), can see and which the rest of us have to get in fits and starts between PPLive buffering sessions. In other words, outside of China, only the die-hard fans (who already loved watching 6 hours of finals with the old system) will bother with it.

[DinkAlot]

You should consider changing your name to Punch's Poodle.

LOL! :p :D :D Sorry, that just struck me as a very funny statement. No offense to anyone. :)

[CWB001]

LOL! :p :D :D Sorry, that just struck me as a very funny statement. No offense to anyone. :)

Thank you. My dry sense of humour is not to everyone's taste but I have my moments.

[DinkAlot]

Thank you. My dry sense of humour is not to everyone's taste but I have my moments.

I was gonna say, you must be from the UK then I realized, YEP, you are. :D I love English humor...long live Monty Python! :D :p

[wedgewenis]

Lets ask a question:

has any fan of badminton ... lets say the average joe watching a live match for the first time .. some really great doubles action - has that type of person ever said afterwards... I dont like how the game is scored and I think they should win points no matter who is serving... doubt it.

has ANNNNYYYYONE Ever in the history of this game besides the IBF EEVVvvver Suggested this .... HAVE YOU EVER EVEN CONSIDERED FOR A SECOND that badminton would suddenly be much improved with DIFFERENT Scoring Rules? 99 percent of players will probably say No. We are only now debating it because the IBF is forcing us too.

I have Never in the last 12 years playing this game Ever questioned or considered even the possibility that there was something wrong with the scoring that needed to be changed..... Neither has any of the hundreds of players i've come in contact with over the years said anything of the sort either.

Listen to the poster who said some truths are self-evident...............

[ViningWolff]

I continue to test out the 21 system.... (played it last night again)


I'm totally on board with the singles. It sure does put pressure to make sure you play a careful game - as in no low precentage kill shots/trick shots, bit overall I don't mind it. Does it play in a power game - certainly, as you now there are les points to play. ( I can put the pedal to metal, knowing I only have maybe 40 rallies to get through).

But doubles - Nope, dont like the new system. WAY to easy to get the score and position screwed up. We were constantly having to stop and think who was where. I'd rather see the 5x9 system - potentially shorter, but still allows for some epic matches. And it makes more firggen sense.

If we are trying to market this to a public without a lot of knowledge, then this is a step in the WRONG direction. making something more complicated is good way to turn away new players.

[cooler]

I continue to test out the 21 system.... (played it last night again)


I'm totally on board with the singles. It sure does put pressure to make sure you play a careful game - as in no low precentage kill shots/trick shots, bit overall I don't mind it. Does it play in a power game - certainly, as you now there are les points to play. ( I can put the pedal to metal, knowing I only have maybe 40 rallies to get through).

But doubles - Nope, dont like the new system. WAY to easy to get the score and position screwed up. We were constantly having to stop and think who was where. I'd rather see the 5x9 system - potentially shorter, but still allows for some epic matches. And it makes more firggen sense.

If we are trying to market this to a public without a lot of knowledge, then this is a step in the WRONG direction. making something more complicated is good way to turn away new players.

so far, i have similar observation as well. I watched KJ vs ng wei, and chen jin vs hafiz matches. For Singles, i think the 21 rally point system generates equal exciting as the 15x3 system. I didnt see much change of strategy, jumpsmash, net, drops, clear, drive, etc are still all their and each rally lasting just as long. The doubles, especially MD goes by just too quick with the 21x3 system. LIke others have commented, it dont leave room for late come back. The MD is the most exciting event, and now it got shortened.

[taneepak]

Thank you. My dry sense of humour is not to everyone's taste but I have my moments.

Yes, indeed, and why not? :D

[w3wmfhe]

i think the 21 pts system work very well so far ..after watch several days of the world cup . i was vote for 15x3 ..but now i might change my mind..but i would still prefer play 15x3 :p :p :p

[DinkAlot]

i think the 21 pts system work very well so far ..after watch several days of the world cup . i was vote for 15x3 ..but now i might change my mind..but i would still prefer play 15x3 :p :p :p

LOL! You are all mixed-up. :p

[taneepak]

LOL! You are all mixed-up. :p

Playing an old system becomes second nature, almost without being conscious of it. Changing to a new system unravels some of these taken for granted automatic movements, because, heck, you have to start using your brains for a start. And this is good, otherwise you degenerate mentally at an alarming rate! How is that for a new twist?:D

[DinkAlot]

Playing an old system becomes second nature, almost without being conscious of it. Changing to a new system unravels some of these taken for granted automatic movements, because, heck, you have to start using your brains for a start. And this is good, otherwise you degenerate mentally at an alarming rate! How is that for a new twist?:D

I'm all for K.I.S.S.

Keep It Simple...Silly. :p

[taneepak]

How would you rate both the old and new scoring systems on the following :
1. Exciting
2. Not too long
3. Not too short
4. Dramatic
5. Easy to understand
6. Visually attractive
7. Human interest
8. Role models and heros
9. Easy to do

There may be other criteria.

[DinkAlot]

How would you rate both the old and new scoring systems

For me, the current scoring of 15x3 is just fine with one exception in doubles. I wish the service line in doubles would be extended to the singles line. This way the server would have more options and the game would be more exciting.

It would be more exciting because the opponent returning serve would be more apt to lift on a short serve and either clear, drop or smash on a high serve. It would minimize the awkward drive rallies that begin most of the time when serving short in the current system.

[event]

For me, the current scoring of 15x3 is just fine with one exception in doubles. I wish the service line in doubles would be extended to the singles line. This way the server would have more options and the game would be more exciting.

It would be more exciting because the opponent returning serve would be more apt to lift on a short serve and either clear, drop or smash on a high serve. It would minimize the awkward drive rallies that begin most of the time when serving short in the current system.It would also lessen the impetus to cheat on the short serves in terms of height and angle.

[DinkAlot]

It would also lessen the impetus to cheat on the short serves in terms of height and angle.

Yes, great point, I forgot to mention that. It would basically be a non-factor.

[taneepak]

BTW the new scoring system of 3x21 points is applicable to MS MD, WS WD, and XD. You cannot get any simpler than that. One size fits all. It is the same with table tennis with its 7x11 points for ms, md, ws, wd, xd. I am flooded with almost daily table tennis coverage but none on badminton. I have a feeling that the new system is geared specifically for TV.

[taneepak]

For me, the current scoring of 15x3 is just fine with one exception in doubles. I wish the service line in doubles would be extended to the singles line. This way the server would have more options and the game would be more exciting.

It would be more exciting because the opponent returning serve would be more apt to lift on a short serve and either clear, drop or smash on a high serve. It would minimize the awkward drive rallies that begin most of the time when serving short in the current system.

But that would make the doubles game more like singles. :D

[DinkAlot]

But that would make the doubles game more like singles. :D

Try it for 3 months then get back to me. ;) :p :D

[cooler]

But that would make the doubles game more like singles. :D

yes.
under current setup, the server is at a disadvantage compare to the receiver. I rather win the rally and let them serve to me instead :D and help me win the next point easier

[taneepak]

yes.
under current setup, the server is at a disadvantage compare to the receiver. I rather win the rally and let them serve to me instead :D and help me win the next point easier

I disagree. I think the serve has an advantage over receiving a serve, because a good serve cannot be attacked and at its best could force a weak return of serve.

[DinkAlot]

I disagree. I think the serve has an advantage over receiving a serve, because a good serve cannot be attacked and at its best could force a weak return of serve.

I disagree. :p How many servers are going to go for a good server when they know if they miss, they lose a point? If anything, servers will be more conservative.

[CWB001]

I disagree. :p How many servers are going to go for a good server when they know if they miss, they lose a point? If anything, servers will be more conservative.

I completely agree.

You cannot afford to serve into the net now as you lose a point as well as the serve.

[taneepak]

That is precisely the point-a mistake should be so recognized (or rather punished) and would lose a point. This need for precision will bring out the best in you, for there is no second chance.

[DinkAlot]

That is precisely the point-a mistake should be so recognized (or rather punished) and would lose a point. This need for precision will bring out the best in you, for there is no second chance.

I disagree with this methodology. There's too much at stake on every point. It's not as "fun" nor as entertaining because people are prone to go for less than more.

[wedgewenis]

I disagree with this methodology. There's too much at stake on every point. It's not as "fun" nor as entertaining because people are prone to go for less than more.

Even pro players agree with You Drink.


This evening the world class singles player Kenneth Johansson went on television to openly critisise the new scoring system of 21 up score with serve or not.

His basic claim was that since you can score without the serve it would make for far less interesting shots and hence more boring badminton.

I have to say I must agree with him and I hope more players can write in to the IBF to add their support to this corruption of the game.

As far as I understand it the IBF beleive that badminton now takes far too long to find a winner of a match.

We tried rules similar to this as far back as 1985 in the Cockney classic mixed event. I have to say it was unpleasant and boring to play. Just think - you serve in the net and loose a point - so whats the result ? All serves become long serves and players with the perfect defense will become the winners and attacking players the loosers.

In singles as players make safer shots all the time it would not surprise me if the crowd fall asleep watching.

The problem with all this is that simply because the IBF wants to attract sponsers using shorter matches in elite badminton then the rules change will probably reach all the way down to your little club mixed match. So in time it will affect you if you don't say your peace.

So write to the BA of E and the IBF and let them know what you think regardless of your suppot of these rules or not. Don' let just a few IBF council members decide the fate of your Friday cosy mixed at the church hall.


I heard Lin Dan critisizing this too, forget where.... So now I'm going to say this officially:

- Any pro player who speaks out against this crap gets put on my NeW c00l LisT

- Any player who doesn't is Dead to me.

[MikeJ]

I disagree with this methodology. There's too much at stake on every point. It's not as "fun" nor as entertaining because people are prone to go for less than more.

I agree (with DinkAlot).

Also, it's interesting that two of the best players (Lin Dan and Taufik Hidayat) have expressed their disapproval of the new scoring system.

A friend of mine said that the new scoring system is like "asking a marathon runner to compete in a sprint."

[cooler]

That is precisely the point-a mistake should be so recognized (or rather punished) and would lose a point. This need for precision will bring out the best in you, for there is no second chance.
that is precisely OUR point of view, one dont make mistake by serving conservatively. A great serve requires shuttle flying <1 cm over the tape or a perfect high serve all the time. The risk is too high if one keep serving those tight and flick serves. This is not tennis, we dont get 2 chances to serve. If tennis only had 1 serve, i bet tennis player wont be going for ace serve as much and/or not as close to the line as much.

here is the math:

if u serve a perfect tight serve, the receiver can still return a neutral reply
if u serve into the net, your partner and coach will hate u
if u serve conservatively, the worst scenario is a attack return drive which you and your partner still have a good chance returning it and resume rallying.

Unlike tennis, a perfect serve is an ACE---> a point
in badminton, a perfect serve only give u a neutral return shot(no guarantee of a point).

Unlike tennis, u can serve conservatively on your 2nd serve (if u miss the 1st serve)
In badminton, if u miss the 1st serve, u lose a point---> baddddddd

[DinkAlot]

that is precisely OUR point of view, one dont make mistake by serving conservatively. A great serve requires shuttle flying <1 cm over the tape or a perfect high serve all the time. The risk is too high if one keep serving those tight and flick serves. This is not tennis, we dont get 2 chances to serve. If tennis only had 1 serve, i bet tennis player wont be going for ace serve as much and/or not as close to the line as much.

Yep, if only one serve in Tennis, everyone would be serving slow(er) spin serves and the serve would be defensive rather than an offensive weapon; and good returners would be teeing off on the serves.

[cooler]

as mentioned by some others, extending the rear double service line to the back would create a more neutral position for both sides AND make the game easier to understand for new tv audience.

[DinkAlot]

as mentioned by some others, extending the rear double service line to the back would create a more neutral position for both sides AND make the game easier to understand for new tv audience.

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

[cooler]

how about this service proposal for doubles:

1. side won the rally get to serve once
2. partner rotate on service after winning the next rally(ie, if player A served first. Next rally won the serve goes to player B)
3. serve from the side base on score, even on right and odd number on left.

simple isnt it?

In tight games like 14-13 or a set to 3 point, i feel the side that got the rally back has extra advantage under the 15x3 system, they have 2 chances to serve and get 1 more point to win at 15-13 or get 3 points on a set. If we change to a 1 serve per rally won, it would create more tense duels and better chance of a come back.

Any comments?

[cooler]

:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D

with all those spare time wasted on watching harry potter, u have time to brush your teeth?

[badrad]

would there be a situation in doubles matches where a weaker or new player that has a poor serve, could wind up serving out the entire game and match? given only 1 serve per side, if your team never gets off the odd or even, you could wind up having the bad server serve out the entire game.

this would make new comers to the game even more paranoid. not everyone will decide or take the time to improve their service skills, and this could prove a frustration for new players, which the new system was intended to draw in?

[DinkAlot]

with all those spare time wasted on watching harry potter, u have time to brush your teeth?

Yes Sir, you never know who you'll have to kiss. :o :p :D :D :D

[cooler]

would there be a situation in doubles matches where a weaker or new player that has a poor serve, could wind up serving out the entire game and match? given only 1 serve per side, if your team never gets off the odd or even, you could wind up having the bad server serve out the entire game.

this would make new comers to the game even more paranoid. not everyone will decide or take the time to improve their service skills, and this could prove a frustration for new players, which the new system was intended to draw in?

not correct.
under the existing 15x3, if u constantly cant score, the same players keep serving to the same opponents at score 0, you have a situation that is truly stagnant. Under my proposal, when the next rally won, the player B get to serve. If player B is better, they can get some point. At least, it take only 1 winning rally to get the serve back. If one team dominates, under 2 serve per side system, they can be way ahead before the weaker team get to serve.

[cooler]

Yes Sir, you never know who you'll have to kiss. :o :p :D :D :D

u kiss butts anyway, i guess my previous post was unnecessary and it does explain the spare time u have to watch harry potter:D :p

[silentheart]

This is just my opinion, please bit my head off if you want.

New system will tilt the game to the advance player. More likly a game between a B vs C level players (assumig B is better), B level player will kill C player at 21 to 5. Also, If I am the C player, I will be forced to serve high and long because I can not take a chance of screw up on short serve. Guess what, I will have to make sure my serve does not go long. Next thing I know, I am getting smashe to death on every serve and lower level player will get discuraged. Beginner will always get killed. Is this the way to promote a great gentalmsn/ladies game? I don't think so. I have alway thought Badminton is a game of setting a fair playing field, give a weaker player a chance to win. If IBF want to see faster game, why not just use plastic shuttle in international match? I think the game will be faster. I will still play 15X3 in the future even if IBF outlaw my beloved 15X3.

[taneepak]

would there be a situation in doubles matches where a weaker or new player that has a poor serve, could wind up serving out the entire game and match? given only 1 serve per side, if your team never gets off the odd or even, you could wind up having the bad server serve out the entire game.

this would make new comers to the game even more paranoid. not everyone will decide or take the time to improve their service skills, and this could prove a frustration for new players, which the new system was intended to draw in?

If the weak server or the new player serves out the entire game and match, then he and his partner would have won a one-sided match. Yes, he would have served from even to odd and back and forth. You get off the odd or even only if one of you wins a rally point when serving just like the old system. The old and the new have the same rule re when to change from odd to even or vice versa-the serving side winning a rally point.

[coops241180]

If the weak server or the new player serves out the entire game and match, then he and his partner would have won a one-sided match. Yes, he would have served from even to odd and back and forth. You get off the odd or even only if one of you wins a rally point when serving just like the old system. The old and the new have the same rule re when to change from odd to even or vice versa-the serving side winning a rally point.

interestingly it figures out that the players on each side take turns serving using the new rules, give it a try - draw the diagrams of who serves at certain scores from the beginning of the game.. no matter how hard you try, the players always end up taking turns serving. The proof of this is simple..
since the person serving stays in the same place when they lose the serve they will automatically be on the wrong side to be serving when you win the serve back. simple eh?

[badrad]

i guess it would be exciting to see a match end on a service fault...

[Sandy]

Hopefully IBF to stop this 3x21 rally pts, and not implement it anymore. :mad:
Badminton will loose the part of interesting of the match. :crying:

[DinkAlot]

i guess it would be exciting to see a match end on a service fault...

It almost happened, can't remember which match... :p

[taneepak]

I have been trying out the new system for a few days now, all doubles. It is very easy to adjust to it. I believe the scores now more accurately reflect the actual proceedings of each game. Some players, especially those who never play singles get a bit lost about why they have to start their serve from the odd side when there is a service change. One thing is certain. The game is faster now.

[taneepak]

i guess it would be exciting to see a match end on a service fault...

Yes, a few times, and why not? A fault is a fault. I have also one game going all the way to 30-29. It doesn't happen often.:D

[AG_Wheel]

This is just my opinion, please bit my head off if you want.

New system will tilt the game to the advance player. More likly a game between a B vs C level players (assumig B is better), B level player will kill C player at 21 to 5. Also, If I am the C player, I will be forced to serve high and long because I can not take a chance of screw up on short serve. Guess what, I will have to make sure my serve does not go long. Next thing I know, I am getting smashe to death on every serve and lower level player will get discuraged. Beginner will always get killed. Is this the way to promote a great gentalmsn/ladies game? I don't think so. I have alway thought Badminton is a game of setting a fair playing field, give a weaker player a chance to win. If IBF want to see faster game, why not just use plastic shuttle in international match? I think the game will be faster. I will still play 15X3 in the future even if IBF outlaw my beloved 15X3.

Doesn't matter the system, a B player should always beat a C grade player easily else that B player should take a step backward and call themself a C1 player.

[AG_Wheel]

i guess it would be exciting to see a match end on a service fault...

No, No and No, shame on you for even thinking it :) , the ONLY exciting finish to any badminton game is with a powerful smash or if aliens land on centre court and zap one player with their laser gun leaving the other a winner by default.:D

[cooler]

Doesn't matter the system, a B player should always beat a C grade player easily else that B player should take a step backward and call themself a C1 player.

yes, the rally point system will weed out less ability player, faster.
That said, i think the rally point system rewards weaker player/team with some points other else they can't under 15x3 system. A weaker player (using singles as an example) will have to win 2 consecutive rallies to earn 1 point. Under 15x3, winning a rally to gain service but lose it later will give you no point. Under rally point system, any mistake by the superior player/team still give the weaker player/team some points.

[taneepak]

No, No and No, shame on you for even thinking it :) , the ONLY exciting finish to any badminton game is with a powerful smash or if aliens land on centre court and zap one player with their laser gun leaving the other a winner by default.:D

If you have an idea that can re-create this on the badminton court, you will have TV broadcasters salivating and paying insane amounts of money. Then we don't need the new scoring system, and all of us will get free NS8000 every week, courtesy of CNN or NBC. :D

[taber]

The Copenhagen Masters are going to be played with 3x5 :D:D
http://sporten.tv2.dk/article.php/3380305.html

[taneepak]

yes, the rally point system will weed out less ability player, faster.
That said, i think the rally point system rewards weaker player/team with some points other else they can't under 15x3 system. A weaker player (using singles as an example) will have to win 2 consecutive rallies to earn 1 point. Under 15x3, winning a rally to gain service but lose it later will give you no point. Under rally point system, any mistake by the superior player/team still give the weaker player/team some points.

But which system reflects more accurately the actual play? To have to win two consecutive rallies just to score one point just accentuates/magnifies the vast difference between a weak and a superior player. The closer to reality the better.

[cooler]

The Copenhagen Masters are going to be played with 3x5 :D:D
http://sporten.tv2.dk/article.php/3380305.html

it's understandable.
Masters participants are usually older in age and we all know people over 30 can't change :D

[taneepak]

it's understandable.
Masters participants are usually older in age and we all know people over 30 can't change :D

Where did you get that from? :D

[badrad]

Yes, a few times, and why not? A fault is a fault. I have also one game going all the way to 30-29. It doesn't happen often.:Dwow! 30 straight service faults to 29 service faults? who'd imagine... well, i guess a fault is a fault... lol...

[AG_Wheel]

But which system reflects more accurately the actual play? To have to win two consecutive rallies just to score one point just accentuates/magnifies the vast difference between a weak and a superior player. The closer to reality the better.

The new system is a better indicator of the actual match, since in the old system the score may not reflect the intensity of a game. Only the new system shows the amount of time a team/player has won the serving back.
eg. If you play against someone where it is a even game but they manage to win more consecutive points, but you win back alot the serving. It will not show in the overall score in the old system. But in the new you'll get a point everytime you win back the serving so the end score will be closer.

[taneepak]

The new system is a better indicator of the actual match, since in the old system the score may not reflect the intensity of a game. Only the new system shows the amount of time a team/player has won the serving back.
eg. If you play against someone where it is a even game but they manage to win more consecutive points, but you win back alot the serving. It will not show in the overall score in the old system. But in the new you'll get a point everytime you win back the serving so the end score will be closer.

You are right. It is possible under the old system to have a score of 15-0 which would be closer to 15-10 under the new system. It is very easy to get an old duck, even if you have won countless non-serving rally points.

[wedgewenis]

your absolutely right ... rallypoint would give a higher score to the loosing player.... but ah... who cares?

Can someone translate this for me? I think its danish :0

Udskældt pointsystem kasseres

20-12-05: 13:17 | af: Dorthe Løwendahl

Badmintonspillerne med Kenneth Jonasen og Peter Gade i spidsen skal alligevel spille efter det gamle pointsystem, når de i næste uge stille op til Copen*hagen Masters. Dermed skal de spille to eller tre sæt til 15, og ikke tre sæt til 21, sådan som det ellers har været testet i Kina i den forgangne uge.

Direktøren i Danmarks Badminton Forbund, Thomas Lund, siger til TV 2 Sporten, at kasseringen både bunder i praktiske omstændigheder og kritikken af systemet:

"De tre sæt til 21 faldt aldrig rigtig i vores smag, og hvis vi alligevel ikke tror på et system, er der ingen grund til at teste det i Copenhagen Masters. Vi tvivler for meget på det."

Thomas Lund kritiserer pointsystemet for, at der er en for lang psykologisk afstand til 21. Samtidig kommer der mere pres på spillerne, fordi hver fejl koster point. Det vil få spillerne til at tage færre chancer, vurderer han.


I think it says Jonnassen and Gade said the new scoring sux and Copenhagen Masters will use 15x3 ... am i right?

[splitstep]

Man.. i think the rules changing is soo stupid just to boost TV figures.. y dont they just call it NUDE (female) BADMINTON, everyone would watch it then :p

[cooler]

Man.. i think the rules changing is soo stupid just to boost TV figures.. y dont they just call it NUDE (female) BADMINTON, everyone would watch it then :p
but that only attracts 1/3 of potential audience and end up with less viewers than now.

[taneepak]

Man.. i think the rules changing is soo stupid just to boost TV figures.. y dont they just call it NUDE (female) BADMINTON, everyone would watch it then :p

You can do it but only once. After that you get put away. Worse, they may ban badminton. Too high a price to pay on balance. Good try. You are at least suggesting ideas to help out.

[taneepak]

interestingly it figures out that the players on each side take turns serving using the new rules, give it a try - draw the diagrams of who serves at certain scores from the beginning of the game.. no matter how hard you try, the players always end up taking turns serving. The proof of this is simple..
since the person serving stays in the same place when they lose the serve they will automatically be on the wrong side to be serving when you win the serve back. simple eh?

That is right. How is that for fairness? You and your partner taking turns to serve after winning the right to serve from your opponents.

[terry]

Man.. i think the rules changing is soo stupid just to boost TV figures.. y dont they just call it NUDE (female) BADMINTON, everyone would watch it then :p

Yeah .... i really wonder how could they come out with this idea!...really have nothing to do!. Better think of how to make the game more popular or how can make it more "LIVE" like soccer!. :mad:

[wedgewenis]

..........bump.........

[DinkAlot]

..........bump.........

Why bump? Everything that can be said has been said. Too much drama. :p

[jerby]

indeed, thread died....everybody agrees to disagree:p

it's no fun when people don't get all fired up and start flamming:crying: (:rolleyes: )

still, i like it very much in singles...it lets me be more explosive and "play the young gun" just rubber-gum the old ones down with save shots:D

[Dandirom]

I'm against the new scoring system. It'll ruin the game and it's true, just when you get pumped up for the game its almost over.

[mulliet]

I'm against the new scoring system. It'll ruin the game and it's true, just when you get pumped up for the game its almost over.

Totally against it, why change something which has worked so well, for so long?

[eugene]

i'm against the new format too......it totally defeat the initial purpose. not exciting anymore....you know who will win when the point reaching near to 21...

[terry]

Maybe we should name it :-

Badminton POINT Version: PUNCH GUNALAN

So next time before we play, we must ask "Ok, which version we are playing?". :p

[taneepak]

Maybe we should name it :-

Badminton POINT Version: PUNCH GUNALAN

So next time before we play, we must ask "Ok, which version we are playing?". :p


I think you are unfairly pinning everything about the new system on Punch. You should put the IBF and all other voting national badminton federations in this slot instead of Punch. Punch takes orders. He doesn't formulate policies.

[Dandirom]

I think you are unfairly pinning everything about the new system on Punch. You should put the IBF and all other voting national badminton federations in this slot instead of Punch. Punch takes orders. He doesn't formulate policies.

yeah, he's juz a footsoldier.:) i guess most of us are juz looking for a PUNCHing bag. hehehe to be fair with IBF, it's not just in badminton that this is happening tho. more and more, all governing bodies (sports or otherwise) have to consider economics in almost all their decisions. it's a fact of life. hehehe

[terry]

I think you are unfairly pinning everything about the new system on Punch. You should put the IBF and all other voting national badminton federations in this slot instead of Punch. Punch takes orders. He doesn't formulate policies.

No..No.. what i mean PUNCH is from Malaysia. So if IBF really using new score format. When we play, the whole world know who is PUNCH and where is he from. That's it. Nothing to do with pinnning everything to PUNCH. :)

[seven]

I think you are unfairly pinning everything about the new system on Punch. You should put the IBF and all other voting national badminton federations in this slot instead of Punch. Punch takes orders. He doesn't formulate policies.

No, because there has been no vote up to now, this wasn't a "democratic" decision.
The only ones to blame are IBF directing body ... and their leader Punch Gunalan!

[terry]

No, because there has been no vote up to now, this wasn't a "democratic" decision.
The only ones to blame are IBF directing body ... and their leader Punch Gunalan!

Be cool! Be cool!... :)

[wedgewenis]

Maybe we should name it :-

Badminton POINT Version: PUNCH GUNALAN

So next time before we play, we must ask "Ok, which version we are playing?". :p


Nah i just call the new system Shortminton ....

[Quasimodo]

Worseminton? :rolleyes: Yes, groan, I know. Let loose with the rotten tomatoes already.

[Dandirom]

Worseminton? :rolleyes: Yes, groan, I know. Let loose with the rotten tomatoes already.

lol. good one.:) from bad to worse. haha

[serviceover]

All depends on which "OLD" system you refer to. If the choice is between rally points (3 x 21 [setting by 2 clear points until 30]) or 3 x 15 Service Points then I would go for the Rally Points, it will speed up the game and make it more exciting for spectators.

However, if the choice was between Rally and 5 x 7/9. My choice would be 5 x 7/9...

[2wheels04]

Here are four forms to write in your feedback to the proposed (experimental?) changes in scoring badminton matches from 01Feb06.

3X21 feedback
3X21 feedback, removal of back service line
5X11 feedback
5X11 feedback, removal of back service line

Although there are only three lines in the "Any comments" section:p; methinks the collective strength of BCers/BFers and others could sway the powers that are and powers that will be at the KL HQ.

There are several points and concerns raised by none other than the previous IBF Chief Exec, one Mr. Cameron, Neil. Interested? -Clicky (http://badders.com/news/item/740/A-change-of-scoring-system%3F).

Emotion and passions are great, these are what makes the world go around, but objectivity is what makes it count. Send any and all these forms to your regional baddy rep; put the shuttle in the IBF's court, so to speak. :D

{Get Acrobat Reader (http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html) to have a dekko at the attachments.}

[cxytdn]

3X21 feedback
3X21 feedback, removal of back service line
5X11 feedback
5X11 feedback, removal of back service line

I think 5X15 is better than any others above - nothing will be changed except for useing rally-piont scoring system and best of 5 games instead of old ones.

[FrenziedEye]

Whatever it is, all i can say is that any proposed scoring systems by IBF are rubbish. :confused:
The current one is fine!!!!!!!!!! It's original, and makes the game that much more unique compared to other sports... People shouldnt have to put up with any of this guniea-pig testing nonsense.:mad:

[baddyminton1]

I think people are missing the main point of the IBF's point of view. They do not intended to try to change the publics way of scoring badminton. Trying to attract new players is there main objective,not pleasing the public. I mean could the IBF care any less on how ordinary people play?

I'll stick to the 15x3 system,I live for preassure and excitement which could not be acheived by using the 21x3 scoring system.

[badrad]

I think people are missing the main point of the IBF's point of view. They do not intended to try to change the publics way of scoring badminton. Trying to attract new players is there main objective,not pleasing the public. I mean could the IBF care any less on how ordinary people play?.Definitely pleasing the public is not on IBF's agenda - quite the contrary - and not only from the scoring debate. But their actions, if they thought was in isolation for attracting new players definitely has public consequences. If the scoring rules get approved and updated in the laws of badminton - the general playing public will be affected.

[ViningWolff]

I don't mind the 3x21 rally point for SINGLES ONLY. Been testing it out for a while and it's not all that bad. If anything you can't let your guard down.

However, for doubles, I don't find it logical. The service is a bit of mess and far too easy to mess up who is where.

If they are going to keep the 3x21 in doubles I'd suggest taking page from the table tennis and have each side serve twice - each player stays put throughout the game with respect to service.

That way each player serves once on their side, then the shuttle goes to the opponent for two serves.

The drawback is that you are always serving to the same person... but you could also make it whoever wins the toss not only gets to choose service, but also gets to pick choose who is serving/recieving. ( I.e. My team wins the toss, we wait to see that the other team puts the better server on their even court, so we elect to put our stronger returner on the even court)

[FrenziedEye]

However, for doubles, I don't find it logical. The service is a bit of mess and far too easy to mess up who is where.




yeah..it is confusing...been practising the system lately and I find that it is very annoying if i begin serving it into the net...not only did you not receive a point but you gave it back to the other side....

it would be interesting to watch those pros play live with this system, see how they cope..but here in aus coverage isnt that great so...=(

[Dandirom]

I don't mind the 3x21 rally point for SINGLES ONLY. Been testing it out for a while and it's not all that bad. If anything you can't let your guard down.

However, for doubles, I don't find it logical. The service is a bit of mess and far too easy to mess up who is where.

exactly. for singles it may not affect a game so much but with doubles they've even messed with the two serves! that's what makes badminton doubles unique. doubles won't be doubles without that.

[Bbn]

Have not beem reading stuff here but recently managed to watch the complete version of 1997 World Championship final between Sun Jun and Rasmussen.

The racquet skill of Sun Jun was fantastic especially when playing with one leg.Also the accuracy and consistency and court craft of both players were amazing,I dont see many players like that today or even in the past.

Perhaps in the new system tragedies like what happened to Sun Jun would not happen again.

Or what happened to Chen Hong in 2003 All england Final or Lee chong Wei against Lin Dan in recent All England or whatever is now happening to Gade.

[Baderz_Jas]

I prefer the old system (15x3). In the recent U13 Gold tournament (Badminton England) we used the new system (21x3). I didn't like it. :( Some players found it kind of confusing even we have someone to keep the score. This will be used again in the next U13 Gold tourney in two weeks' time. But strangely they use the old scoring system in other age group.:confused:

[Dandirom]

It is confusing. Even those keeping score get confused - and to think IBF says it's supposed to make it easier for those unacquainted with the game. Well, that's bureaucracy for you.

[taneepak]

It is confusing. Even those keeping score get confused - and to think IBF says it's supposed to make it easier for those unacquainted with the game. Well, that's bureaucracy for you.

I now use the new system exclusively. I have played with the old system for 50 years. But despite the great disparity in the times I have played with both systems, I am at home with the new system as much as I was in the old system. It is strange that if you cannot bring yourself to try out anything new, you will find it very difficult to accept it.

[black_knight006]

Old Old Old!!! The new system relies too much on hoping that your opponent will make a mistake. Also, younger players are going to have an advantage over better, older players. They will be able to out-stamina their opponents because they have the youth. It's a gift that the older players don't have. If the youth can just keep the bird in play they can tire their opponent out and make them inable to make effective shots, where it become a waiting game. I don't like it at all!

[DivingBirdie]

new system. i didn't like the badminton scoring system the very first day i started playing badminton.

[Dandirom]

I now use the new system exclusively. I have played with the old system for 50 years. But despite the great disparity in the times I have played with both systems, I am at home with the new system as much as I was in the old system. It is strange that if you cannot bring yourself to try out anything new, you will find it very difficult to accept it.

Of course, everyone can adjust - but just because we adjust does not mean that the claim that the new system is easier than the older one is true. Wether we admit it or not, the fact remains that it is very confusing for newbies. I have been playing alternately with the new system since December and with the singles game, aside from the fact that games are much shorter and less strenuous, I feel it's workable and I haven't met that many players who really hate it - In singles, I agree that it MAY lessen the chance of injuries. With doubles though, now that's an entirely different story. I'm more of a doubles player and aside from games being too short and less strenuous (You hardly break into a good old sweat in this new sytem in doubles), the serve is totally messed up. In any game, there's nothing more exciting than being down by a large point spread and making a sweeping comeback - in the new system, chances of that are virtually nil. There's hardly a player I've met who likes the new system in doubles. If IBF decides to retain the doubles serve and even just lengthen the games a bit, I dare say they'll get this new system through with much less negative feedback.

[taneepak]

I don't believe tennis or table tennis doubles have two serves. Wouldn't it be more confusing to newcomers to find that in badminton singles have only one serve but doubles have two, when both tennis and table tennis doubles and singles have only one serve? Also a point won is a point won, like in tennis and table tennis. But in badminton a point won is conditional on who the server is before a point is awarded, resulting in different end results-a real point is given on a rally won by the winning side, but only the right to serve with no meaningful reward if the rally is won by the receiving side. In the old system, you can only win a point when you or your side are serving but cannot lose a point when serving, even when your opponents win the rally. In the new system you can win or lose a real point under almost any situation. The reward is instantaneous, not conditional as in the old system. You have less room for error. The tolerances are tighter. There is less fooling around. The concentration is more intense. Skills count more than stamina. Unfair strategies where one country's players tire out players of another country to secure a decisive advantage are now harder.

[Dandirom]

I don't believe tennis or table tennis doubles have two serves. Wouldn't it be more confusing to newcomers to find that in badminton singles have only one serve but doubles have two, when both tennis and table tennis doubles and singles have only one serve? Also a point won is a point won, like in tennis and table tennis. But in badminton a point won is conditional on who the server is before a point is awarded, resulting in different end results-a real point is given on a rally won by the winning side, but only the right to serve with no meaningful reward if the rally is won by the receiving side. In the old system, you can only win a point when you or your side are serving but cannot lose a point when serving, even when your opponents win the rally. In the new system you can win or lose a real point under almost any situation. The reward is instantaneous, not conditional as in the old system. You have less room for error. The tolerances are tighter. There is less fooling around. The concentration is more intense. Skills count more than stamina. Unfair strategies where one country's players tire out players of another country to secure a decisive advantage are now harder.

I don't really see how tiring out an opponent is unfair - if someone uses it as a viable strategy then good for them. If the opponent is really good then his or her stamina will match his or her skills. Having played with the new system, I do see your point about the rally system but the fact remains that we have to say goodbye to those thrilling comebacks.

As for the doubles serve, that's exactly my point. it's what set badminton apart from other racquet sports - i dare say, it's something many of us baddy addicts have come to love. Add to that the fact that of almost all racquet sports, badminton is the only sport where the serve is not offensive - it's very rare that a server gets to score and instant point as opposed to an ace in tennis. Two serves balanced it out a bit but now it's messed up. I do think that compromise is a good alternative. But like i said, if it does go through, it's no reason to stop playing badminton. :)

[DinkAlot]

Unfair strategies where one country's players tire out players of another country to secure a decisive advantage are now harder.

Oh please, the next thing you'll say is the IBF should outlaw trick shots. :rolleyes:

:p :D

[demolidor]

I don't believe tennis or table tennis doubles have two serves.

Actually as everyone knows but might not see it like that you get two serves every point in tennis.
The national championship here are using the new system btw. Wonder how the evaluation will turn out :p

[yao_zhou]

IMHO. 15 point system was perfectly fine.
I tried out the 21 point system a few times and it was irritating how the game is over in about 30 mins.
This is because it takes me a few good rallys before I can get my engine going.
Now due of the rally point, by the time I'm pumped for the game the first set is nearly over.:mad:

Surely with 21 points u have longer games and therefore get pumped earlier in the game??

[taber]

Longer games? No. They will be shorter because of "running score"
crap system.

[Dandirom]

Surely with 21 points u have longer games and therefore get pumped earlier in the game??

nope. game time is cut up to 30%.

[CWB001]

I don't believe tennis or table tennis doubles have two serves. Wouldn't it be more confusing to newcomers to find that in badminton singles have only one serve but doubles have two, when both tennis and table tennis doubles and singles have only one serve? Also a point won is a point won, like in tennis and table tennis. But in badminton a point won is conditional on who the server is before a point is awarded, resulting in different end results-a real point is given on a rally won by the winning side, but only the right to serve with no meaningful reward if the rally is won by the receiving side. In the old system, you can only win a point when you or your side are serving but cannot lose a point when serving, even when your opponents win the rally. In the new system you can win or lose a real point under almost any situation. The reward is instantaneous, not conditional as in the old system. You have less room for error. The tolerances are tighter. There is less fooling around. The concentration is more intense. Skills count more than stamina. Unfair strategies where one country's players tire out players of another country to secure a decisive advantage are now harder.

I owe you an apology. You are not Punch's poodle. You are Punch himself!

[taneepak]

Actually as everyone knows but might not see it like that you get two serves every point in tennis.
The national championship here are using the new system btw. Wonder how the evaluation will turn out :p

Sorry, what I meant was that in doubles, tennis and table tennis do not have a second server.

[taneepak]

Add to that the fact that of almost all racquet sports, badminton is the only sport where the serve is not offensive - it's very rare that a server gets to score and instant point as opposed to an ace in tennis. :)

Looks can be deceiving-in badminton a serve can be either defensive or offensive. This is because, unlike tennis, a badminton serve is not a one short winning rally. It either sets you up for an all out offence or defence. The choice is yours to suit your game plan.

[taneepak]

Oh please, the next thing you'll say is the IBF should outlaw trick shots. :rolleyes:

:p :D

These two are not related. Team or country strategies to gain an unfair advantage under the old system have been exploited from the days of Wong Peng Soon. Countries with many top players can play havoc with top players from other countries that do not have the quantity. Yes, seedings at least try to make this fairer by separating the few top seeds from eliminating each other early. But China has so many top players that it is now becoming common for their junior players to knock out other countries' top players. Do you think badminton will remain a popular sport if the AE have an all Chinese finals in all the 5 events? If all the Open Championships in the world see near complete dominance by the Chinese, badminton will be dropped from the Olympics for sure.

[taneepak]

I owe you an apology. You are not Punch's poodle. You are Punch himself!

I don't think you are being sincere in apologising. Let us stick to the subject. Being of opposing views should not be a reason to be ungentlemanly. Why can't we agree to disagree? :D

[taneepak]

As a matter of fact even the new scoring system's serve, still retaining some of the old, could be made fairer by allowing each side to serve an equal number of serves, like in table tennis, instead of the rally winning side always serving. This will mean each side will have an almost equal number of serves, with one side serving one more serve.
Any change in the scoring system is hard on players who are reluctant to adapt or change. Not many players feel comfortable with anything new, not unlike why not many people can think out of the box.

[Dandirom]

Looks can be deceiving-in badminton a serve can be either defensive or offensive. This is because, unlike tennis, a badminton serve is not a one short winning rally. It either sets you up for an all out offence or defence. The choice is yours to suit your game plan.

you don't understand what i mean - in badminton, the serve itself can never be offensive. Unless your opponent is incredibly stupid you can't get a point with just the serve. Granted, if you're a really good short server you can almost always force a return that gives you and offensive - but that's on the return, not the serve itself as opposed to tennis where you can have an ace. When you say a serve can be either defensive or offensive you mean it can set you up for the offensive but by itself it could never be offensive. Maybe that would have been right with the serve where you hit the feather first but it's illegal. With the serve right now, any good enough player can return it - then and only then, after your serve is returned do you gain the offensive.