New scoring format

[coops241180]

i'm just against shortened match durations and the lessened chance of a comeback...

Coops

[seven]

i'm just against shortened match durations and the lessened chance of a comeback...

Coops

We agree :)
Lessened chance of a comeback is the direct consequence of rally scoring.

[badrad]

after watching some newbies play yesterday, I couldn't help but think how much quicker they would have been off the court if it was rally points. i watched this group playing doubles, and them going around each player at least 3 times each of them losing their services, i would say it must have been a few minutes at least that the score stayed static.

using the rally point counting (regardless if 3x15 or 3x21), there would have been 12 or 16 points chewed up right there! they would have been off the court so much quicker!

[CWB001]

after watching some newbies play yesterday, I couldn't help but think how much quicker they would have been off the court if it was rally points. i watched this group playing doubles, and them going around each player at least 3 times each of them losing their services, i would say it must have been a few minutes at least that the score stayed static.

using the rally point counting (regardless if 3x15 or 3x21), there would have been 12 or 16 points chewed up right there! they would have been off the court so much quicker!

And then so would you!

[badrad]

And then so would you!well... yes... and your point would be?

[CWB001]

well... yes... and your point would be?

:confused: That you would spend less time on court per game.:rolleyes: :)

[badrad]

:confused: That you would spend less time on court per game.:rolleyes: :)no... that idiots and newbies would spend less time on court... messing up serves and watching the service go from player to player without a single point being made. it's often excrutiating watching and waiting for some groups to get off the court.
and yes, the downside would be shorter time for us as well.

[cooler]

no... that idiots and newbies would spend less time on court... messing up serves and watching the service go from player to player without a single point being made. it's often excrutiating watching and waiting for some groups to get off the court.
and yes, the downside would be shorter time for us as well.

yes.
the rallypoint system would expedite game duration especially for newbies.
Under 15x3 system, the score can remain static for a very long time as it's hard to get a point when serving. They just keep switching serves between sides.

[taneepak]

As usual you have taught me all about something I know, but you didn't answer my question. What is the 4th system? How do MD, WD & Mx differ from one another? Why do you exagerate your case by making out that the trial singles is identical to the trial doubles? It is 3 vs 2. And irrelevant.

I did say you were correct that there are 3 systems in the old scoring system. They are :
1. 3x15 + only server can win point + 1st & 2nd serves in doubles + always serving from the right side on a service-over. This applies for MD, MD, WD.
2. 3x15 + only server can win point + server to serve from the left or right dependent on his/her score even for service change-over +no 2nd serve. Applies to MS.
3. 3x11 + as in 2 above.
The new system has the following common to MD,WD, MX, MS, WS :
1. 3x21 + no second serve + point won or lost regardless of who serves + to serve from the left or right side dependent on the score.

Therefore, it is 3 systems vs 1 unifying system. :D

[taneepak]

no... that idiots and newbies would spend less time on court... messing up serves and watching the service go from player to player without a single point being made. it's often excrutiating watching and waiting for some groups to get off the court.
and yes, the downside would be shorter time for us as well.

Yes, the old system can be and is sometimes being abused. In the old system you can make your lousy playing boss look good to earn a promotion. The new system quickly stops this form of currying favour or abuse of the system. :D

[Pete LSD]

Is there a 15 minutes rule?


no... that idiots and newbies would spend less time on court... messing up serves and watching the service go from player to player without a single point being made. it's often excrutiating watching and waiting for some groups to get off the court.
and yes, the downside would be shorter time for us as well.

[badrad]

Is there a 15 minutes rule?you know, if we can convert to a 21 point rule rally point, 42 or so bad serves is enough to kick the newbies off the court! in the current system, there would be no end to bad serves.
if we can take a estimate of 5 seconds or so to pick up the shuttle, get ready and to serve (serve goes into net) 42 serves would chew up around 200+ seconds - okay lets say 3.5 minutes. you know, newbies could be off the court in under 5 minutes!!!
woohoo!

[badrad]

i simplified the estimate, since to be realistic - if everyone continued to serve poorly, it would go into tiebreak - with sudden death at the 29... so there would be an absolute end point to the never-ending newbie games...

[Pete LSD]

I would say 15 minutes for regular play and 5 minutes for newbies who constantly serve into the net :D :D :D.


i simplified the estimate, since to be realistic - if everyone continued to serve poorly, it would go into tiebreak - with sudden death at the 29... so there would be an absolute end point to the never-ending newbie games...

[taneepak]

yes.
the rallypoint system would expedite game duration especially for newbies.
Under 15x3 system, the score can remain static for a very long time as it's hard to get a point when serving. They just keep switching serves between sides.

In a way the old scoring system can be fair. The newbies can use the system to prolong their games, just to pay back those better players who think the newbies are a nuisance and are not good enough to be on the same courts. :D They may be newbies but they certainly know how to play the system. :D

[cooler]

In a way the old scoring system can be fair. The newbies can use the system to prolong their games, just to pay back those better players who think the newbies are a nuisance and are not good enough to be on the same courts. :D They may be newbies but they certainly know how to play the system. :D

i'm wasn't being bitter, i was just stating my observation :D

It is usually the bullies(5-10%) who find way to extend court time unfairly (yes, there are ways) or wont move out of court after their matches. 99% of newbies are very respectful of the club rules. The other 1% just don't know the club rules which is understandable.

[seven]

You guys are going completely off-topic!
We don't decide a scoring system in order to get rid of newbies but in order for the game to be more exciting to watch.

And in fact, I'm sorry to say that the goal is more to encourage newbies to play rather than the opposite.

If rally scoring defenders need so silly arguments to defend their point, I think this is going against them. :rolleyes:

[badrad]

You guys are going completely off-topic!
We don't decide a scoring system in order to get rid of newbies but in order for the game to be more exciting to watch.

And in fact, I'm sorry to say that the goal is more to encourage newbies to play rather than the opposite.

If rally scoring defenders need so silly arguments to defend their point, I think this is going against them. :rolleyes:I don't see how we are off topic at all considering the topic is about the new scoring format. IBF decides that the scoring should be changed - to make it more TV friendly. The majority of players don't play on TV. If the by-product of the change reduces the average time per game for players, then so be it. OMG - you mean the IBF didn't intend for that to happen????

Of course, the tongue-in-cheek implications would be that newbies - who this scoring change is supposed to entice, could also be the victims of significantly reduced their on-court time. :D.

[cooler]

You guys are going completely off-topic!
We don't decide a scoring system in order to get rid of newbies but in order for the game to be more exciting to watch.

And in fact, I'm sorry to say that the goal is more to encourage newbies to play rather than the opposite.

If rally scoring defenders need so silly arguments to defend their point, I think this is going against them. :rolleyes:

relax 7, it's only 3 posts out of 266 posts about newbies and it's still related to the scoring system.

[seven]

Of course, the tongue-in-cheek implications would be that newbies - who this scoring change is supposed to entice, could also be the victims of significantly reduced their on-court time. :D.

We will ALL have our court time reduced, not only the newbies.

[cooler]

We will ALL have our court time reduced, not only the newbies.

that's what peter LSD trying to say, the new rally point system reduce newbie play time much more so than other kind of players

[seven]

that's what peter LSD trying to say, the new rally point system reduce newbie play time much more so than other kind of players

I don't see why it would reduce MORE newbie match duration than pro match duration.
It just reduces match duration for everyone.

The only matches which duration isn't significantly reduced with the new scoring format are the VERY UNEVEN matches where one side is getting thrashed.

[taneepak]

I don't know about shorter games. I have been playing the new system for more than 2 weeks now. True there were some games that were shorter, but there were a lot of games that were about the same. Try it out for at least 60 games and time them. BTW there were a few players who also say that the new system gives you a better "fight-back" chance. This also will need more games to find out.

[seven]

BTW there were a few players who also say that the new system gives you a better "fight-back" chance. This also will need more games to find out.

This is mathematically impossible.
Official matches have also proved the opposite.

Same for match duration, unless you turn from fast attacking game to slow rally game, it is impossible for match durations to be longer. (except for the very uneven matches, as said previously)

[badrad]

We will ALL have our court time reduced, not only the newbies.yeh... said it already , wrote it already...
the only other thing missing is having a Zen-za Yuma... lighten up already.

[taneepak]

How many of you can honestly say you have played at least 60 games using the new scoring system? It will be interesting to find out.

[twobeer]

How many of you can honestly say you have played at least 60 games using the new scoring system? It will be interesting to find out.

And what would be the point of that?

I don't have to eat **** more than once to figure out it doesn't taste good :)

Why dont you try

a) 60 times of 25x3 rally scoring
b) 60 times of 15x2 service scoring + deciding set to 21 Rally
c) 60 times of 5x15 Rally scoring
d) 60 times of 1x63 rally scoring
e) 60 times of 2x42 rally scoring
f) 60 times of 7x7 rally scoring
e) 60 times of 5x21 rally scoring
f) 60 times of 5x20 rally scoring
g) 60 times of 4x20 rally scoring
h) 60 times of 3x11 rally scoring..

When you are finished trying those I have some more suggestions..

Because you do not mean these can't be better than 3x21 rally?? Unless You have given each a chance and really tried it for many games, how it works out.. right??? It can be superior, and perfect for TV!!

/Twobeer

[taneepak]

And what would be the point of that?

I don't have to eat **** more than once to figure out it doesn't taste good :)

Why dont you try

a) 60 times of 25x3 rally scoring
b) 60 times of 15x2 service scoring + deciding set to 21 Rally
c) 60 times of 5x15 Rally scoring
d) 60 times of 1x63 rally scoring
e) 60 times of 2x42 rally scoring
f) 60 times of 7x7 rally scoring
e) 60 times of 5x21 rally scoring
f) 60 times of 5x20 rally scoring
g) 60 times of 4x20 rally scoring
h) 60 times of 3x11 rally scoring..

When you are finished trying those I have some more suggestions..

Because you do not mean these can't be better than 3x21 rally?? Unless You have given each a chance and really tried it for many games, how it works out.. right??? It can be superior, and perfect for TV!!

/Twobeer

The point is simply to fairly compare the two scoring systems. I believe that playing at least 60 games of the new system will make you a fairer judge when comparing A with B. I have not tried the other scoring systems you suggested because none of them has been chosen to officially replace the old system, well at least not yet. If one of your scoring systems is chosen to be the new system, yes, I will be fair and give it a try. You have my word of honour.
Well, I can tell you of my group's and my experience after playing about 100 games using the new system. The earlier prejudices will start to evaporate as you play more games. You in fact become a better player, more focused, more "getting it right the first time" because there is no second time or special exemption from losing a point just because you were serving.
Don't you think it will be fairer to mention the number of games one has played using the new system when commenting on its merits or demerits? This will take out the emotional aspect and will at least have some semblance of being more objective.

[Loh]

Don't you think it will be fairer to mention the number of games one has played using the new system when commenting on its merits or demerits? This will take out the emotional aspect and will at least have some semblance of being more objective.

I agree that we should give the new system a try before passing judgement. As to the number of games to be tested, it really depends on the parties concerned, but to be fair a reasonable number must be played.

Having experienced the 3x15 points system for such a long time and enjoying it, it comes as no surprise that most people will reject the change to the proposed 3x21 system outright, without even experimenting with it for a sufficient period. Views may change for the better if we are prepared to accommodate the change as Taneepak and his group had experienced with the new system.

But we need to try to understand the problems the IBF Council is facing to strike a reasonable compromise with all concerned. World sports have changed quite a bit and in order for IBF to be seen in the running to spread the game of badminton worldwide and gain more ground, IBF will need to enhance its financial muscle to be able to do a good job. So IBF's goal of securing greater TV coverage through much higher sponsorship to meet its popularity objective cannot be derided. The new scoring system is one of the measures to help them succeed.

As ardent fans of badminton, therefore we must try to acknowledge IBF's difficulties and help it achieve its goals. This may even mean a little 'sacrifice' on our part by departing from our usual way of playing the game to 15 points. We can still enjoy badminton with the new system, maybe with shorter rallies, but we do so with the reminder that we are helping IBF in its endeavours and maybe ultimately, we become the sole beneficiaries instead.

Please keep an open mind and try to think of it this way. Remember too that the new system may force us, including the pros, to elevate our own game to a higher level. Creativity and innovation may well push badminton to another level never seen before! :)

[2wheels04]

How many of you can honestly say you have played at least 60 games using the new scoring system? It will be interesting to find out.

Hey Shuttlers,

Not played the TwoBeer60 system, but officiated a wee bit more, granted these were club matches. It is great to know that scoresheet keeping doubles is much easier with the Point A Rally system, no doubt about this. Even Right, Odd Left. Time durations not significantly shorter or longer, methinks median times are similar!

3x15 PAR21
MS 32(6)min 34(9)min
n= 66 47
MD 44(3)min 42(6)min
n= 41 44

NB: average duration in minutes (range), median values were within 2min for each category; n are the number of matches; average games/match 2.2

I wonder how much fun it will be for those umpires who officiated junior matches, especially the U9, you know those ding-dong ones, which went for aeons ;) , the heart bled for those buggers in green. PAR definitely a way to go!

[kanive]

Hey Shuttlers,

Not played the TwoBeer60 system, but officiated a wee bit more, granted these were club matches. It is great to know that scoresheet keeping doubles is much easier with the Point A Rally system, no doubt about this. Even Right, Odd Left. Time durations not significantly shorter or longer, methinks median times are similar!

3x15 PAR21
MS 32(6)min 34(9)min
n= 66 47
MD 44(3)min 42(6)min
n= 41 44

NB: average duration in minutes (range), median values were within 2min for each category; n are the number of matches; average games/match 2.2

I wonder how much fun it will be for those umpires who officiated junior matches, especially the U9, you know those ding-dong ones, which went for aeons ;) , the heart bled for those buggers in green. PAR definitely a way to go!

I think, first, you need to make up your mind on what you want to say -- does rally21 take less time? is rally21 duration more consistent? :D

[taneepak]

I think, first, you need to make up your mind on what you want to say -- does rally21 take less time? is rally21 duration more consistent? :D

I thought he said more things than that, but more from a scorekeeping official's point of view and based on club matches he officiated.

[CWB001]

Hey Shuttlers,

Not played the TwoBeer60 system, but officiated a wee bit more, granted these were club matches. It is great to know that scoresheet keeping doubles is much easier with the Point A Rally system, no doubt about this. Even Right, Odd Left. Time durations not significantly shorter or longer, methinks median times are similar!

3x15 PAR21
MS 32(6)min 34(9)min
n= 66 47
MD 44(3)min 42(6)min
n= 41 44

NB: average duration in minutes (range), median values were within 2min for each category; n are the number of matches; average games/match 2.2

I wonder how much fun it will be for those umpires who officiated junior matches, especially the U9, you know those ding-dong ones, which went for aeons ;) , the heart bled for those buggers in green. PAR definitely a way to go!

Hey! That is great. There is no reason to change over then, if time durations are the same.

These figures seem odd to me, though. They do not fit in with my experience.

[CWB001]

Don't you think it will be fairer to mention the number of games one has played using the new system when commenting on its merits or demerits? This will take out the emotional aspect and will at least have some semblance of being more objective.

Ahh. So only your views count. I really must read "1984" again, because I can now begin to see what the arguments will be when the IBF confirms the trial as successful in May.

[taneepak]

Ahh. So only your views count. I really must read "1984" again, because I can now begin to see what the arguments will be when the IBF confirms the trial as successful in May.

I make no such claim. All views are welcome, the more transparent and the more "experience of the new system" the more credible. I am sure you will agree with me that it does not make a case of against the new system look good if the new system is being torn to pieces before evaluating it. The most credible decision will come when all the IBF votes decide after this year's Thomas Cup. Until then let us play more games of the new system and build up an informed opinion by then. Is this that hard to do? :D

[twobeer]

Just for the record.. I would be more than willing to try any proposed scoring format, if I beleive there is a need, and that 15x3 isn't good enough or have big flaws that need to be fixed..

I happen to think 15x3 is OK.. So why mess with something that is OK got most people...

We all know there are great challenges making badminton more known in many regions, popular as a spectator sport, etc..

We have lots of problems that NEED fixing..

Why waste precious time fiddling with the things that do work and isn't a problem for the sport..

If You, IBF or anyone can prove 15x3 IS a PROBLEM, then I'll be willing to try alternatives (I have already been playing 5x7 etc when that was official, and have user PAR21 in racketlon (the PAR21 scoring has been used for years in badminton in past of racketlon tournaments , check out http://www.racketlon.com/ ).

I am just getting sick and tired of this mantra that changing the scoring system will "fix" every problem with, marketing, TV, popularity, yadda yadda..

I think the basis for the change is invalid, therefore I think its a "diversion" from real actions that could help to solve real problems... This hurts badminton more than it helps promote it...

It's not like IBF encourages people to try it out and then vote for the system.. They actually force it onto major IBF events for the worl top players without a decent trial period or a majority of the badminton community behind it..

Personally I think this stinks.. And Whats next.. OF 21x3 isn't the holy grail..That fixes averything...Will they start trying a new scoring format every year, until badminton gets "fixed"..

Sorry, But If IBF can't come up with a good valid problem description for 15x3 I will not just sit silent when stupidity is formalized...

/Twobeer

[seven]

Yes, I agree!
Before thinking about which scoring system is "better", the question is "Why should we change???" :confused:

I have heard no valid answer to this.

[2NDround]

I really sympathize with twobeer. He must be really frustrated. I felt the same. Imagine having your favourite game changed for no damn good reason. But there are always people who will do this. Sometime it takes more courage to do nothing than to try something just to prove to people that you are doing your job.

[taneepak]

You can actually make your case against the new scoring system stronger if you have some experience of what the new system is all about, If not it could be viewed as uninformed and a lot of hot air. If you honestly want to kill the system, do something about it by playing a reasonable number of games, get a consensus among your fellow players and umpires, and then fire your big gun. But now all I hear are pot shots that will never find their way to your country's badminton federation. You will be surprised that some small European countries like Holland and Belgium have as many votes as Indonesia or China. Even Canada and the US have the max. no. of votes.
Also, what would you think if the new system was the idea of a major badminton country (not Malaysia)? :D

[taneepak]

Just for the record.. I would be more than willing to try any proposed scoring format, if I beleive there is a need, and that 15x3 isn't good enough or have big flaws that need to be fixed..
/Twobeer

What you say and feel so strongly may be perfectly valid for you and even for me as a player. But the IBF and all other affiliated federations are slowly learning that money doesn't grow on trees. They need to generate more funds. With enough funds you have more options. With more options you are on your way up instead of staying put or be even threatened by the Olympic Committee to have badminton dropped from the games and have funds cut off. If you run a deficit do you think banks will provide overdraft fundings to badminton associations?
The new system obviously has TV in mind, more so than the old system which has a lot of time wasting that could be better put to money-generating TV use.
Alas, sometimes the view from one end is so different from the other end-the governing body and the court player. I have no trouble stepping into the shoes of both ends. :D

[kanive]

You can actually make your case against the new scoring system stronger if you have some experience of what the new system is all about, If not it could be viewed as uninformed and a lot of hot air.

I HAVE played a LOT of rally21. Not 60 games, but at least 21 (isn't that enough? :p ) And I DO NOT like it. It messes with hard-built strategies and tactics that we have developed over the years. It makes the game less strenous, and easier for the lazier, both the mental and the physical kind. Half the singles games I win with rally21, I know I would have lost if it had gone on to a real game. You can win games now at 5-4. It feels like cheating. I don't like it.

What exactly do you see in rally21, anyway? You have never answered that question, even though people have asked it of you innumerable times, so I don't really expect an answer other than "give it a try, it is easy to get used to." No, I want you to look at some of the comments here, see how heartfelt they are, and speak to them on the same level. rally21 will change the way badminton is played, and for the worse. Is that really what you want?

[twobeer]

What you say and feel so strongly may be perfectly valid for you and even for me as a player. But the IBF and all other affiliated federations are slowly learning that money doesn't grow on trees. They need to generate more funds. With enough funds you have more options. With more options you are on your way up instead of staying put or be even threatened by the Olympic Committee to have badminton dropped from the games and have funds cut off. If you run a deficit do you think banks will provide overdraft fundings to badminton associations?
The new system obviously has TV in mind, more so than the old system which has a lot of time wasting that could be better put to money-generating TV use.


Well, the answer is simple...

If IBF can show me a TV-station that requires IBF to change to Rally 21x3 scoring i order to give badminton more air-time... I will agree it's worth a shot..
If they say Yes, we promise in writing, to increase the air-time of badminton next year provided IBF change to rally 21 scoring..
Could IBF show any station formulating this requirement and promising more air-time in return??? I don't think so!!

Could they even find one sponsor, that states they will put money into badminton if 3x21 is used but not if we stick to 3x15.. I think not...

I doubt any TV-station has guaranteed it will air badminton more if games are shorter and rally scoring is used... If IBF have no commitment from broadcasters... Maybe IBF is just chasing rainbows?... Did the 5x7 produce significant more air-time?? What research has led them to beleive a 3x21 rally scoring would produce more air-time???

I do however think TV-stations may tell IBF they need advertisment spots to get more air-time to badminton.. But I do not think they give a "rats ass" about if its 15x3, 21x3 5x7 or whatever as long as they get the ad-dollars in...

Its simple market economy.. More viewers = more ads = more expensive ads = more money = more air-time... IT IS NOT ABOUT SCORING SYSTEM USED...

There must be some flawed logic thinking that shorter games wth less breaks would magically produce more air-time.. (Unless this is explicitly required by TV-stations and put into writing in contract between IBF and the TV-stations). Games are not that long today, and breaks etc could easilly be put in for short ad-spots.. in the 3x15 system (maybe less allowed toweling etc, but timed scheduled shorter breaks for toweling, drinking, with ad-sport..) (could have ad spots at 8 in all 3 sets for example)..



Alas, sometimes the view from one end is so different from the other end-the governing body and the court player. I have no trouble stepping into the shoes of both ends. :D

Then try to step into the shoes of the TV-station manager.. Is he really going to commit to show 3x21 badminton much more than he did commit to 3x15 badminton...My answer to this is no.. These numbers are not what interests him..He couldn't care less if rules where changed to wear silly hats, plastic shuttles, or if serving-rules are changed or whatever IBF makes to the game.. What he cares about are number of viewers and number of advertisers..

Getting more viewers and sponsors should be the priority.. changing scoring is NOT the solution...

[taneepak]

I HAVE played a LOT of rally21. Not 60 games, but at least 21 (isn't that enough? :p ) And I DO NOT like it. It messes with hard-built strategies and tactics that we have developed over the years. It makes the game less strenous, and easier for the lazier, both the mental and the physical kind. Half the singles games I win with rally21, I know I would have lost if it had gone on to a real game. You can win games now at 5-4. It feels like cheating. I don't like it.

What exactly do you see in rally21, anyway? You have never answered that question, even though people have asked it of you innumerable times, so I don't really expect an answer other than "give it a try, it is easy to get used to." No, I want you to look at some of the comments here, see how heartfelt they are, and speak to them on the same level. rally21 will change the way badminton is played, and for the worse. Is that really what you want?

Well, at least your opinions can be taken more seriously than those who have not tried the new system.
Frankly I find that basically you still play the same strokes and generally the same tactics in the new system. I am now more focussed and more serious. Best of all I don't give away silly serving mistakes that I used to do. Yes, my doubles serving has improved. Against weaker opponents the game finishes in double quick time. Against evenly matched opponents it is comparable to the old system.

[twobeer]

Well, at least your opinions can be taken more seriously than those who have not tried the new system.
Frankly I find that basically you still play the same strokes and generally the same tactics in the new system. I am now more focussed and more serious. Best of all I don't give away silly serving mistakes that I used to do. Yes, my doubles serving has improved. Against weaker opponents the game finishes in double quick time. Against evenly matched opponents it is comparable to the old system.

Have you really tried it :p ???

Beating a poor player requires me to play 42 rallies with this system... With 3x15 I only need 30 (or 31 if i loose the coin-toss).. So its 12 more points in the rally system.. almost an extra game!!! :eek: :eek:

3x21 streches out uneven matchup and shortens tight games.. extremely silly imop.

[taneepak]

Have you really tried it :p ???

Beating a poor player requires me to play 42 rallies with this system... With 3x15 I only need 30 (or 31 if i loose the coin-toss).. So its 12 more points in the rally system.. almost an extra game!!! :eek: :eek:

3x21 streches out uneven matchup and shortens tight games.. extremely silly imop.

You are right. But the weaker opponents I played against were not beginners. Also they were too cavaliar with their serves : obviously they were not too mathematically inclined! :D

[taneepak]

During the December 2005 official opening of the new IBF office in KL, Poul Erik Hoyer-Larsen, Denmark's 1996 Olympic singles gold medallist, was quoted as saying that he was all for the change to the new system. Reasons given by Hoyer-Larsen were that the player now has to be quicker to react to each point and the level of concentration is very high. He also says it will bring the game to a higher level. However, he would have preferred the new system to be best of 5x21 instead of 3x21. Now, maybe some of you know something that Larsen doesn't know.

[seven]

What you say and feel so strongly may be perfectly valid for you and even for me as a player. But the IBF and all other affiliated federations are slowly learning that money doesn't grow on trees. They need to generate more funds. With enough funds you have more options. With more options you are on your way up instead of staying put or be even threatened by the Olympic Committee to have badminton dropped from the games and have funds cut off. If you run a deficit do you think banks will provide overdraft fundings to badminton associations?
The new system obviously has TV in mind, more so than the old system which has a lot of time wasting that could be better put to money-generating TV use.
Alas, sometimes the view from one end is so different from the other end-the governing body and the court player. I have no trouble stepping into the shoes of both ends. :D

TV coverage has nothing to do with rally scoring or serve scoring.
Fund have nothing to do with rally scoring or serve scoring.
Badminton is nowhere near being dropped from the Olympics.

[seven]

I am now more focussed and more serious. Best of all I don't give away silly serving mistakes that I used to do. Yes, my doubles serving has improved.

This is purely psychological, I think you should try and be focussed and serious whatever the scoring. :rolleyes:
Same thing for your serves. In fact, in serve scoring, if your service is bad, you will never score!! :p


Against weaker opponents the game finishes in double quick time. Against evenly matched opponents it is comparable to the old system.

So there I think you either never tried rally scoring (and never worked your maths at school) or you were so biased when trying that your impressions were opposite to the truth.
It is a clear mathematical fact that very uneven matches last longer with rally scoring whereas very close matches are much shorter.

I had posted the mathematical prooth in a thread somewhere, if you're interested you can look for it. (I can't bother finding it again)

[seven]

In case you're interested, here are official IBF stats on last WC. (in an attempt to evaluate rally scoring)

[taneepak]

To avoid any possible errors my last post might create, these were the words that were reported to be from Poul Erik Hoyer-Larsen during the official opening of the new IBF office in KL in December 2005 :
"I support this change. One has to react at each point and the level of concentration is very high. It certainly brings the game to a higher level".
My experience with the new system certainly supports this. My serve and focus are now better. You think it is all in my head? No, definitely not. Or maybe Hoyer-Larsen was talking nonsense? :D

[CWB001]

You can actually make your case against the new scoring system stronger if you have some experience of what the new system is all about, If not it could be viewed as uninformed and a lot of hot air.

So the IBF delegates voting on this matter will all have played lots of matches under the new system, won't they? They wouldn't want to be accused of being full of hot air.

[seven]

Well I am more serious and focussed when playing team matches than individual matches.
And I am rarely serious and focussed when playing training matches.
What does this prove? (except that there are many factors which have strictly nothing to do with the scoring)
Being serious and focussed is essentially a question of motivation I find.

Obviously the sorter the match is, the less room for mistakes there is.
But this has nothing to do with serve scoring or rally scoring as 5x7 serve scoring matches were also shorter and left less room for mistakes.

[seven]

So the IBF delegates voting on this matter will all have played lots of matches under the new system, won't they? They wouldn't want to be accused of being full of hot air.

Good remark ! :p

[taneepak]

So the IBF delegates voting on this matter will all have played lots of matches under the new system, won't they? They wouldn't want to be accused of being full of hot air.

No, but they will represent their countries' federations, who would have gathered enough feedback from their respective players and officials by May 2006. That is how it is supposed to work. You may want to find out who your country's delegate is. He is your man. Who knows, sports can sometimes be dirty. Scandals like those of Olympic Committee members being bribed abound.

[coops241180]

This is purely psychological, I think you should try and be focussed and serious whatever the scoring. :rolleyes:
Same thing for your serves. In fact, in serve scoring, if your service is bad, you will never score!! :p



So there I think you either never tried rally scoring (and never worked your maths at school) or you were so biased when trying that your impressions were opposite to the truth.
It is a clear mathematical fact that very uneven matches last longer with rally scoring whereas very close matches are much shorter.

I had posted the mathematical prooth in a thread somewhere, if you're interested you can look for it. (I can't bother finding it again)

you mean this one seven?
http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20334&page=12&pp=18

enjoy everybody - that was quite a long winded and well balanced thread.. with quite a hefty dose of maths and science used to prove points :)

Coops

[seven]

you mean this one seven?
http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20334&page=12&pp=18

enjoy everybody - that was quite a long winded and well balanced thread.. with quite a hefty dose of maths and science used to prove points :)

Coops

Good find Coops! :)
I couldn't remember where this had been posted... :p

[coops241180]

Good find Coops! :)
I couldn't remember where this had been posted... :p

hehe - i only rememebr it because i spent soooo long trying to argue against you :)

plus i've still got the code i wrote to simulate the maths :D

how could i forget :)

[twobeer]

During the December 2005 official opening of the new IBF office in KL, Poul Erik Hoyer-Larsen, Denmark's 1996 Olympic singles gold medallist, was quoted as saying that he was all for the change to the new system. Reasons given by Hoyer-Larsen were that the player now has to be quicker to react to each point and the level of concentration is very high. He also says it will bring the game to a higher level. However, he would have preferred the new system to be best of 5x21 instead of 3x21. Now, maybe some of you know something that Larsen doesn't know.

I think many here knows lots that Larsent doens't (even those of us with lesser skills on the badminton court :) ).. I don't think just being a former world class palyer makes you much of an "authority" on the game/players today and the scoring.. Also he doens't really propose 3x21 does he, but 5x21.. Which we all know (who tried it) would be far to outdragged, long and boring for uneven matches..

Isn't this just the "old" players wish to be competetive with the younger stronger, more fit players :confused: :D

[seven]

If Hoyer-Larsen defending a rally-scoring system (it's not so clear he's defending it BTW :p) means that rally-scoring system is better, why don't you take into account all the top players or coaches (Li Yongbo, danish team etc...) who have spoken against the rally scoring system.
This argument proves strictly nothing, sorry to say so... :rolleyes:

[twobeer]

So the IBF delegates voting on this matter will all have played lots of matches under the new system, won't they? They wouldn't want to be accused of being full of hot air.

ROFL!! good one!

[Cruiser008]

Wow if it becomes permanent this would be one of the worst changes to ever happen to the sport. :mad:

[Cruiser008]

I agree with KJ, my biggest beef with the new scoring is that there really isn't any opportunity for a comeback. If it's 15-20, you're dead. :(

I also agree that this is one of the biggest drawbacks.

[wedgewenis]

they should throw badminton out of the olympics if it goes 21x3 ..that will show the IBF whats what

The sport already lacks the nessesary competition between nations to support an olympic tournament this will only make the top 3 or 4 nations even more dominant.


Your also kinda crapping all over badminton history by making the game much shorter....what about the classic matches that went over 2 hours long? ... usually the best matches are also the longest ........

Right now badminton is a complete sport ... fitness, endurance isn't always the biggest part but it is an important factor, take that away and you open the door for players who neglect thier physical training .. I've seen many matches where the less fit player lost and deserved to loose ...but under the new system surely would have won.... thats just wrong.

[Dandirom]

LOL. Why stop at 21? Why not make it a 3 point game. They will be able to televise an entire tournament in half a day. I am sure the TV stations would love that.

yeah, i've never heard anyone complain about the length of a match - EVER. i didn't know badminton's rules depended on some TV networks time slots. i personally play 4-5 games every night and none of 'em are too long!

[Dandirom]

Right now badminton is a complete sport ... fitness, endurance isn't always the biggest part but it is an important factor, take that away and you open the door for players who neglect thier physical training .. I've seen many matches where the less fit player lost and deserved to loose ...but under the new system surely would have won.... thats just wrong.

I totally agree. If a player loses a match because of his/her lack of endurance, too bad. That's what makes badminton so much fun, it's not just quickness or strategy -endurance and fitness are also really important. this new scoring thing is gonna destroy badminton.

[2NDround]

A lot against the new scoring system have been said. A lot of us agreed that it is bad. But Majority more often than not do not have a say. The one in power has it (in this case the IBF). What can the Majority do if IBF steamroll over them?

Here are some suggestions:
Only do what we enjoy. If we don't like it, don't do it.
Do not go to watch games with 21 points rally system.
Do not participate in any games with 21 points rally system.
Do not support any clubs using or promoting 21 points rally system.
Do not support any players promoting 21 ponts rally system.

Eventually the Majority will win. Because this is where the money is coming from. All baddy fans ask yourselves this question:

In the past 6 months how much money you have spent on the game? If you add it all up, the figure will amaze you. The amount is not Peanuts.

[CWB001]

This is taken from an article on the IBF website:

"At the International Badminton Federation Council Meeting held in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia in December 2005, the council approved the decision to experiment with the 3x21 rally point scoring system. This will apply to all IBF sanctioned events, carrying world ranking points, with effect from 1 February 2006. In addition to IBF sanctioned events, the upcoming multi-sport event, the Melbourne 2006 Commonwealth Games has also decided to adopt the new scoring system.

IBF welcomes the Commonwealth Games transition to the new era of badminton. Melbourne 2006's far sighted decision to go with the new scoring system is positive for the sport. IBF is confident that the new scoring system will create a more exciting game for spectators and be more appealing to the media especially television.

In accepting the new direction of the sport, Melbourne 2006 and the Commonwealth Games have shown that they are a multi-sport event for the modern era. IBF congratulates Melbourne 2006 on their decision. Punch Gunalan, Deputy President said, "The M2006 decision follows on the success of the Chinese Masters event that was held in the new format in December 2005. The IBF Council is confident this would be the scoring system to be used for the next Olympics."

This does not sound like the competent, open-minded IBF that Taneepak would have us believe the IBF is, does it?:rolleyes: The grammatical errors are the IBF's, by the way.

I wonder what analysis has been carried out (and, of course, what the success criteria were) on the Chinese Masters to enable Punch Drunk, er Gunalan to claim it was a success. I think I know the answer to that question, actually.:)

No, of course the decision for permanent change is going to be an open and honest one and has not been pre-judged at all. Not.:mad:

It is all a :crying: shame.

[seven]

Yes, as I said several times this will not be a democratic decision based on whether the rally scoring system is better or not.

IBF has already taken its decision and the only question for them now is to calculate how to manipulate and corrupt the votes (if needed) so that it is not refused.

I hope many of us will stand against it, and that some of the dominating federations will stand against it. (or rather enough of them)

If not, I think our favourite sport is in a very bad situation.

[Quasimodo]

For a little insight into internal IBF politics, you may want to read this article by Neil Cameron who was the IBF Chief Executive from 1998 to 2003.

http://www.badders.com/news/item/740/A-change-of-scoring-system%3F

Especially refer to the last 3 sections titled: Testing and implementation; Political factors; and, Summary.

[seven]

Very interesting article.
Obviously agree about the political part as it is a known issue.

I don't agree that serve scoring is "complicated" however, and it is in fact what makes badminton so much more exciting than table tennis or other rally scoring sports where come-backs or almost impossible.

I think if a change is considered needed, the 5x9 scoring system was the best suited one, but was abandonned for political reasons... :rolleyes: (as usual!)

We shouldn't forget that badminton has to start by touching badminton enthusiasts before touching anyone else.
If IBF even fails pleasing badminton fans, they are in a very bad position... :(

[DinkAlot]

I've played a few more games with the new scoring system and do not like it. With friends, even serious games wind up with all of us laughing. Why? For example, yesterday:

One point was very hard earned by the opponent. They rallied like heroes and got the point from us. It was grueling. Then they serve and hit the shuttle into the net and we just fell on the floor laughing because all their heroics just got negated. :p

[Dandirom]

I've played a few more games with the new scoring system and do not like it. With friends, even serious games wind up with all of us laughing. Why? For example, yesterday:

One point was very hard earned by the opponent. They rallied like heroes and got the point from us. It was grueling. Then they serve and hit the shuttle into the net and we just fell on the floor laughing because all their heroics just got negated. :p

one more reason to scrap the new system - too much laughter during a game weakens a player's ability.:p hahaha at least with the old system, if you made an error your side still gets another serve. and this new system has absolutely no room for comebacks - if the other team gets a lead of 3 or more points its 'bye bye'.:) and to think that all this is mostly because it's not 'tv friendly'. many people think badminton is boring only because of the camera angles - watching a game from top view makes all movements seem slow. if they put more side view angles it would look faster, less boring - many of my friends who love badminton actually prefer watching tennis on television because of that. what they need is a good director.:)

[Dandirom]

if 'bad' goes to 'worse' though, i guess we'll all have to get used to the new system. i have now tried it for almost two months and i play 5 days a week from 5pm-9pm and for me, the worst thing (aside from the shortness of the games and the impossibility of comebacks, that is) about the new system is that almost everyone is now afraid to take risks. yes, it's supposed to encourage players to have 100% concentration but instead of raising the level of play most players have tended to become over-cautious. no more shots that brush the net, no hairpin shots, and almost everyone almost always clears when using the new system.

[Dandirom]

and if they want TV audiences to watch badminton more, how 'bout this...

http://pic.piczo.com/img/i24281585_92478_3.jpg

or this...

http://pic.piczo.com/img/i27276574_40596_3.jpg

or this...

http://pic.piczo.com/img/i31730599_7347_3.jpg

lol. if TV audiences see 'em playing i guess that'll hold their attention.:D

[cooler]

and if they want TV audiences to watch badminton more, how 'bout this...

http://pic.piczo.com/img/i24281585_92478_3.jpg

or this...

http://pic.piczo.com/img/i27276574_40596_3.jpg

or this...

http://pic.piczo.com/img/i31730599_7347_3.jpg

lol. if TV audiences see 'em playing i guess that'll hold their attention.:D


hahaha, pretty good.
IBF can use people like u :)

[CWB001]

if 'bad' goes to 'worse' though, i guess we'll all have to get used to the new system. i have now tried it for almost two months and i play 5 days a week from 5pm-9pm and for me, the worst thing (aside from the shortness of the games and the impossibility of comebacks, that is) about the new system is that almost everyone is now afraid to take risks. yes, it's supposed to encourage players to have 100% concentration but instead of raising the level of play most players have tended to become over-cautious. no more shots that brush the net, no hairpin shots, and almost everyone almost always clears when using the new system.

This is exactly what I've been saying. IBFrankenstein has created a monster that will come back and destroy him by making the game LESS attractive to TV audiences.

[seven]

if they put more side view angles it would look faster, less boring - many of my friends who love badminton actually prefer watching tennis on television because of that. what they need is a good director.:)

That's funny, because I find that tennis on TV is actually very boring to watch!! :p

[coops241180]

That's funny, because I find that tennis on TV is actually very boring to watch!! :p

hang on.. tennis uses the same top down format that badminton uses..

i think it's easier to televise tennis becuse the games height is negligible.. you don't need to show the height the a high serve goes too - or how tight to the top of a net a serve or a smash / drop is..

in tennis the interesting bits for spectators are the speed of the serve, the length of the baselines and the whether passing shots are successful or not..

in my opinion there is no appreciation for how fast the players travel, it is more to do with the reactions of the players at the net and the power of the player at the back whether he/she be serving or hitting baseline-baseline / passing shots..

drop shots are a applauded when they come off in tennis - but they are extremely difficult to perform with the spin on the ball and when they don't come off the player is slated for playing the wrong shot..

Coops

ps - this thread is about the new scoring system right? ::D :confused: ;)

[DinkAlot]

and if they want TV audiences to watch badminton more, how 'bout this...
lol. if TV audiences see 'em playing i guess that'll hold their attention.:D


LMAO! BWAAHAHAHAHAAH!!! So funny! :p

[Dandirom]

hang on.. tennis uses the same top down format that badminton uses..

i think it's easier to televise tennis becuse the games height is negligible.. you don't need to show the height the a high serve goes too - or how tight to the top of a net a serve or a smash / drop is..

in tennis the interesting bits for spectators are the speed of the serve, the length of the baselines and the whether passing shots are successful or not..

in my opinion there is no appreciation for how fast the players travel, it is more to do with the reactions of the players at the net and the power of the player at the back whether he/she be serving or hitting baseline-baseline / passing shots..

drop shots are a applauded when they come off in tennis - but they are extremely difficult to perform with the spin on the ball and when they don't come off the player is slated for playing the wrong shot..

Coops

ps - this thread is about the new scoring system right? ::D :confused: ;)

lol. good points about tennis there and yes, it's about the new system.:D i was just pointing out that there are other ways to fix badminton's presentability to the viewing public - as opposed to just changing the scoring system.:)

[Loh]

I have to return to this thread because of what I saw on TV last night (Singapore time) the live telecast of the Birmingham AE Finals and the two valid points proffered by the IBF when it proposed a change to a shorter 3x21 rally point scoring system.

The World No.1, Lin Dan, almost collapsed out of the finals when his legs gave way after a jumpsmash thrown at Lee Hyun Il. Even before the match both his legs were taped at the knees and thighs, something not seen in his previous matches. The slow-motion of his fall showed both his ankles bending in an awkward position. Luckily he did not seem to suffer any fracture as he managed to get up and walk out of court for medical attention. It appeared that it was his left knee that had weakened considerably and that part had to be bolstered subsequently by a knee guard.

Actually, the inevitable had to come. He spent a total of 380 min or more than 6 hours before this final meeting with LHI. The breakdown is as follows:

R1 v Jang Young-Soo (Kor) 15-5, 9-15, 15-9 (81m)
R2 v Kasper Oedum (Den) 5-15, 15-6, 15-4 (82m)
R3 v Wong Choong Hann (Mas) 15-6, 15-5 (60m)
QF v Kenneth Jonassen (Den) 15-10, 15-3 (60m)
Sf v Lee Chong Wei (Mas) 15-9, 10-15, 17-14 (97m)

Now, these long and bruising encounters surely had an adverse effect on his physical and it had been made abundantly clear in the Final! And this is what the IBF has identified as detrimental to the professional player's career and suggested the shorter 3x21 scoring instead. Injury will cut short his prospects, reduce his earnings and related opportunities. Worse, fans will not be able to see him in action for some time! :(

Lin Dan must have treasured the AE title for despite his obvious pain, he continued his fight. This is one aspect of Lin's fortitude that has not quite been revealed in the past and it must be counted as his most precious quality as a champion. Even his worthy opponent Lee Hyun Il must be surprised and could not take advantage of Lin's situation. Instead of capitalizing on Lin's bad luck, Lee went on to make a number of unforced errors to raise Lin's confidence level. But in so doing Lin might have done considerably harm to himself. I fear that he might have sustained a permanent injury and would not be able to recover in time for his other important tournaments, most notably the Thomas Cup and the WC.

The long-drawn Finals, interspersed with the prize-presentation ceremonies, were rather energy sapping even to a TV watcher like me. Live telecast started a 8.30 pm but by about 2.30 am Singapore time, my eyes could not open anymore and I had to forego the ongoing battle between the world's best WD pairs, compatriot Chinese Gao/Huang v Zhang/Yang, at first thinking that Gao/Huang would surely lose. I did not watch the outcome but as it turned out, they surprised by winning in 3-games.

Even taking my time as a guide, I had to spend 6 hours no less, to watch the proceedings. For someone new to the game, they would have lost patience and gave up much earlier. Even I found some parts of the matches boring. Imagine if they played the Finals in the evening, it will cause much inconvenience to those without transport.

So IBF's point that the 3x15 system is too long and could be boring is valid.

I hope things will turn out better with the proposed new 3x21 rally points scoring system. ;)

[kanive]

I hope things will turn out better with the proposed new 3x21 rally points scoring system. ;)

Better? I beg to differ.

Re injuries to players -- nobody wants anyone to play with injuries, but if you want drama and human interest and toughness in a sport, that is inevitable. Ask anyone which game of Michael Jordan they remember the best, and the answer is inevitably "the flu game". There is something ineffable about humans taking on their own limitations and exceeding them that it is critical, absolutely critical, in how a sport is percieved. I believe that badminton, as constituted, can touch the limits of human endurance and abilities, and this should be a selling point, not an embarrassment. Hard as this may seem, I have to say, tough patooties, injuries are a part of sport.

Re match durations -- you compare a 5-event telecast of a badminton final to one-event tennis telecast? The obvious solution to your 6-hour dilemma would be to hold the finals of the different events on different days, and not to cut down the game time so that 5 events can be compressed into the time of a movie!

[seven]

Agree with kanive.

And I don't think shorter matches means less injuries, as players will emphasize their training on power and musculation, with more risks of injuries at training...

Think of it : in athletism, are there more injuries in 10km run or in sprint events?
The answer is that there are more injuries in sprint events.

About match durations, I also think that the matches must be better scheduled in big tournaments.
There shouldn't be two rounds on the same day for example.

[2NDround]

Most injuries are not caused by length of matches but by too short rest in between matches. The human body need rest to recover before it is ready for another tough match. The IBF know this, why do they try to shorten matches instead of schedule more rest in between games?

Consider this. In soccer, 2 matches in a week is consider tough and coaches and managers complaints of risk of injuries to their players. In badminton, seeded players played 4 to 5 games a week, non seeded players played even more games. Whose fool idea is this?

[Loh]

The Star, 24 Jan 2006

Tuesday January 24, 2006


Dissapointed shuttlers told to look ahead

BY RAJES PAUL

It all ended in painful defeats for the veteran doubles pair of Choong Tan Fook-Lee Wan Wan Wah and national number one singles shuttler Lee Chong Wei at the All-England Championships in Birmingham.

They had made good runs before letting slip golden opportunities to achieve their best-ever results in the prestigious championships.

It was the second time after the 2004 tournament that they lost to the same pair at the same stage. With the defeat, Malaysia are still without the All-England's men's doubles title since the Sidek brothers, Razif and Jalani, won it in 1982.

Chong Wei, who is now ranked second in the world, came close to reaching the men's singles final for the first time but he squandered a 13-5 lead in the rubber game against eventual champion Lin Dan of China and lost 9-15, 15-10, 14-17 in the semi-finals on Saturday.

The All-England was the last tournament using the tradition 15-point best-of-three-game scoring format before the International Badminton Federation (IBF) introduce the experimental 21-point best-of-three games rally scoring format for all their tournaments from Feb 1.

The first tournament to use the format is the Thomas-Uber Cup qualifying rounds, which will be held in Jaipur, India, from Feb 13-19. The format will also be used in the Commonwealth Games, which will be held in Melbourne from March 15-26.

Chief coach Yap Kim Hock said that Tan Fook-Wan Wah and Chong Wei should put the agonising defeat at the All-England behind them and together with all the other players look ahead to the new challenges under the new scoring format.

The All-England was the last of three back-to-back international tournaments in Europe after the Swiss and German Open tournaments and Kim Hock felt that Malaysia achieved good results overall.

“Overall, it was a good start to the year,” said Kim Hock in a telephone interview from Birmingham yesterday.

“We won two titles at the Swiss Open. And thanks to a one-week training stint at Milton Keynes, the players performed well at the All-England.”

The Swiss Open did not see the participation of Chinese players and Chong Wei and the men's doubles pair of Chan Chong Ming-Koo Kien Keat emerged as the champions.

At the All-England, two back-up pairs – Mohd Fairuzizuan Mohd Tazari-Lin Woon Fui and Gan Teik Chai-Mohd Zakry Abdul Latif – were the surprise semi-finalists.

For 2003 All-England champion Mohd Hafiz Hashim, it was a disappointment in Birmingham. He was beaten by China's world junior champion Chen Jin in the first round. Chen Jin came into the All-England as the German Open champion.

“The seniors must learn from their All-England defeats while the back-up players must continue with their good performances. Now, the focus should be on adapting to the new scoring format,” said Kim Hock.

“There will be changes to our training programmes to adapt to the change in the scoring format. The pace of the game will be faster. The players must be psychologically stronger to excel under this format.”

While China looked set to rule after winning four of the five titles at the All-England, Kim Hock said that the new format would put everyone on an equal footing.

“For a start, it will be a more open game. We will have a better knowledge of the game after trying it out in the first few tournaments,” he said.

“For some players like Lee Tsuen Seng and Yeoh Kay Bin, this may be an opportunity for them to rise again.”

Tsuen Seng was among the top performers when the International Badminton Federation (IBF) experimented with the seven-point best-of-five-game format for year from May 2001.

[wedgewenis]

I thought the Trial was going UNTIL February ... not starting in February ... what the hell is going on here.

This is rediculous, anyone see the great comeback 3rd game of Emms and Robertson in the AE ..... the current system is excellent, in the last several tournaments alone - AE, Copenhagen, German etc....using 15x3 there have been numerous examples of drama proving the worth of the current and already widely accepted scoring system.

[wedgewenis]

I thought the Trial was going UNTIL February ... not starting in February ... what the hell is going on here.

This is rediculous, anyone see the great comeback 3rd game of Emms and Robertson in the AE ..... the current system is excellent, in the last several tournaments alone - AE, Copenhagen, German etc....using 15x3 there have been numerous examples of drama proving the worth of the current and already widely accepted scoring system.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Did anyone see the Video Interview with Bach and Gunawan

Tony Gunawan said in an interview that Not Many People Like it ... further that 21x3 Ruins the beauty of the game... and that one of the big things with the sport is coming from behind ... he said now when you are behind comebacks arn't going to happen ... both Gunawan and Bach looked pretty dumbfounded as to why the IBF is using 21x3 ... he also mentioned he would rather have 7 point games (perhaps 9x7) instead ... Bach said he knew they were only doing it for TV sponsorships but had his doubts with that aswel. saying also that he hoped they'd return to the current system eventually.

[MikeJ]

DAWN Internet Edition (http://www.dawn.com/2006/01/18/spt9.htm)

Yahoo! Singapore Sports (http://sg.sports.yahoo.com/060117/1/3xyjz.html)

Badminton: Gade blasts new scoring system


BIRMINGHAM,(England), Jan 17: Former world number one Peter Gade has launched a scathing attack on the new scoring system which is about to start on the world circuit.

The International Badminton Federation (IBF) recently decided to adopt point-per-rally 21-up scoring, which will be introduced soon after this week’s All-England Open championships here have finished.

The IBF believes this system will be easier to understand than the traditional hand-in hand-out 15-up scoring for all events except women’s singles (11-up), which has been the norm since organized badminton began more than a century ago.

But there appears to be plenty of dissent against 21-up scoring, and Gade, who will be trying to regain the All-England title this week, feels the same way.

“I don’t think the IBF will like the new system,” he asserted. “It is very clear to me that this is a political matter.

“Table tennis had this scoring for 50 years. They changed from this (to 11-up) with great success but those running badminton, they look at it, and say ‘we want your old system and we think it will do good’.

“I can’t see any reason for doing that. We had an opportunity to vote for a more intense and exciting game. It has been exciting only from about 10-all or 11-all and now, moving to 21, but it will become even worse.

“I think this is political, because Asia dismissed the five games to seven-up system and have regretted it, but won’t go back to it again. Five to seven is best for badminton and I really wish it would be part of the future.”

Gade is referring to is the political conflict within the IBF between Asia and its supporters and Europe and its supporters, which recently led to three different scoring systems being adopted within two years on the world circuit.

Although the five to seven experiment produced a faster, shorter, and more unpredictable version of the sport, it was not endorsed by the IBF’s annual meeting.

And when the IBF council adopted an unheard of combination of scoring - men’s singles and doubles to 15-up but any event involving a woman (women’s singles and doubles and mixed doubles) to be played to 11-up - a bitter controversy developed.

It provoked dissent from more than 30 countries, causing an extraordinary general meeting which forced the IBF to back down, and brought the compromise of a return to traditional scoring.

Gade believes the imposition of the latest scoring system is a political reaction to that; the players will discuss their reaction to it at their annual meeting this week.

“But I don’t think the players can do anything about it,” the Dane said. “When we expressed our opinion to the IBF before, nothing happened. I don’t think the players’ opinions will matter.

“And when so many Asian players are dominated by associations and their governments it is almost impossible.”

“We can send signals to the media. And every time I am asked I will react in the same way. But the IBF is in control and as long as it’s like this, it’s very hard for the players to change anything.

Meanwhile a complaint from Denmark about the IBF-made draw for the All-England championships has caused the men’s doubles to be redrawn.

“If this draw was made by computer then one would expect a review of the programme,” said Finn Traerup, the Danish performance director. “But I would think this has been made by hand.

“There are too many glitches which makes it critical to get the review because the IBF website lacks information and we don’t know how people earn their ranking points any more.”—AFP

[MikeJ]

The Indian Express (http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=87784)

Hidayat blasts the new scoring system

The Indonesian wants to build a consensus to try and change it for the better of the game

JAYDIP SENGUPTA
Posted online: Monday, February 13, 2006 at 0000 hours IST

JAIPUR, FEBRUARY 12: He’s been at it since 1999 when he was just 17. But now, yet again, the World and Olympic champion Taufik Hidayat of Indonesia will have to wait for another year to fulfill his dream of winning the All-England Championships. At 24, he has already made the finals twice and was hoping to go one better this year. Only, fate had other plans in store.

‘‘This is probably one All-England I don’t regret missing because I had to prepare for my marriage on February 4,’’ said the former World No. 1 on the sidelines of the Asian Zone preliminaries of the Thomas and Uber Cup qualifiers here.


The only player in history ever to win the Olympic gold and the World Championships, doing so in 2004 and 2005, respectively, Hidayat’s ranking has dropped to 10, but that doesn’t bother him one bit.

“I missed the Swiss and German Open due to a knee injury, apart from missing the All England championship. That has affected my rankings, but I am back,” he said. That’s bad news for his rivals, especially world number one China’s Lin Dan, whom he had thrashed 15-3, 15-7 to become the world champion.

This will be Hidayat’s first tournament according to the new rally-scoring system which awards points after every rally and the game is decided at 21. He hardly seemed happy about it. ‘‘I don’t like the new system at all and so far as I am aware, none of the top players like it either. It’s too fast. I am going to take it up with the other players during the Thomas and Uber Cup finals in Japan and see what can be done,’’ he said. Recently, World No 6 Dane Peter Gade Christiansen had blasted the new scoring system as well.

Incidentally, this is Hidayat’s first visit to India and he didn’t sound too impressed with the arrangements. ‘‘Apart from accommodation problems — the rooms aren’t quite to my liking because of the faulty cooling system - there is also the problem of birds flying inside the stadium apart from a disturbing draft,’’ he said, before formally ending the interview session.

[ctjcad]

Hmm, interesting articles to get the perspective of both Taufik and Peter Gade. Thanks for sharing MikeJ :) :cool:
Well, i wasn't surprise to read Taufik's comment, as this is his first experience using the new system. But it should be interesting, winning or losing, if he indeed goes abt his plan to "take it up" with the other players later during the T & U Cup tourney. I wouldn't be surprise if IBF pull-back this new scoring system idea soon after the tourney. FWIW(for what it's worth), at least they've given it a try.. :rolleyes: :p
On another note, at the end, Taufik sounded like when he was at the recent World Championships where he complained abt draft/wind problem. Hehe, now it's accommodation as well as playing stadium problems... :rolleyes: :p :confused:

The Indian Express (http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=87784)
This will be Hidayat’s first tournament according to the new rally-scoring system which awards points after every rally and the game is decided at 21. He hardly seemed happy about it. ‘‘I don’t like the new system at all and so far as I am aware, none of the top players like it either. It’s too fast. I am going to take it up with the other players during the Thomas and Uber Cup finals in Japan and see what can be done,’’ he said. Recently, World No 6 Dane Peter Gade Christiansen had blasted the new scoring system as well.

Incidentally, this is Hidayat’s first visit to India and he didn’t sound too impressed with the arrangements. ‘‘Apart from accommodation problems — the rooms aren’t quite to my liking because of the faulty cooling system - there is also the problem of birds flying inside the stadium apart from a disturbing draft,’’ he said, before formally ending the interview session.