IBF is a joke (propaganda to promote new scoring system)

[ccskaki]

Try having a look at the latest article on their official website:

http://www.intbadfed.org/Portal/desktopdefault.aspx?tabid=10&ItemID=1903

The last paragraph reads:
" The event has received positive feedback from many people and although there are some quarters who have expressed alternative opinions, it seems that the overall consensus is that many have welcomed the new scoring system. Umpire Tomoharu Sano of Japan said: "The game is now very fast and the officials have to be very alert too at all times. It's an exciting change." "

Wow, so according to this IBF article, the new scoring format was welcomed by most people (overall consensus). But why can't they find a positive comment from the top players or coaches who are the people most qualified to give a professional opinion? Why can't they find a positive comment from the spectators who are the ones really concerned about the entertainment value of matches. No they have to get a comment from an UMPIRE!

The reason is because the truth is that most players didn't like the new scoring system. Just read your newspapers (not written by IBF).

IBF must be desperate. Someone must have some personal agenda behind all this.

[DinkAlot]

Any comments from spectators with first hand experience? Anything heard through the grapevine? Anything other than IBF and media comments?

[Nephrus]

Just my personal opinion from watching the games online. The current scoring system works really well with Singles Games, because you do notice a definate amount of time saved, and the players have to be more careful about their shots as singles should be. But for doubles I think they should keep the rule of only getting a point in your service while maintaining it without a second serve, this way the game can "slow down" a little and we the viewers can enjoy a more "Lengthy" and exciting game (Even the chinese commentators say the doubles game, especially MD, is the jewel of watching badminton but isn't that fun to watch right now, despite their china team winning, hahaha) . Just some thoughts after watching the games...

[ccskaki]

I watched the game between Bao and Sairul Amar. The whole watch was over in a very short time. Shorter doesn't make it more interesting. There's no more depth in the game. Only smash smash smash. I want to see more of the other skills which are equally important. But no, now it's like 2 mad man playing against each other. There's no sense of professionalism anymore.

If one day badminton matches at the highest level last only about 35 - 40 minutes, it's going to degenerate into an amateur sport.

[Quasimodo]

One perhaps unintentional side-effect of the new scoring format to shorten matches is that we may no longer be able to use the often quoted Han Jian vs. Morten Frost and Kevin Curren vs. Boris Becker match statistics to show just how physically demanding badminton is. I mean those statistics will always stand, but if the new scoring system stays, then they'll no longer be applicable.

[_muse]

Ccskaki, I don't think you should develop such a strong opinion on one match (if indeed you only saw one match). But i'm gonna sound a bit hypocritical here, since i myself have only been privy to a single match, and base what i can on that. The match I saw was Chen jin against Hafiz. I gotta say, I liked how that game was played out through the new scoring system. The pace of that game was considerably faster than many games i've seen using the 3X15 system. It highlighted Chen Jin's potential to become one of the best players out there, showing just how explosive a player he can be. In fact, I think it was his initiative to push the pace of the game as fast as he could that caused Hafiz to falter and lose the match. Hafiz just couldn't keep up.

The match couldn't have taken more than 35 minutes, but i don't think that short limit of time prevented these two players from playing their best or from showing how skilled they are with a badminton racket. Anyway, it's only been a couple days since the new scoring system has taken effect. I think there's much more to see with the new scoring system with the world cup finals coming up.

[wedgewenis]

I just vomited all over my keyboard....

I totally buy what the guy is saying about the Umpire ... its quite obvious a very large portion of players, coaches and fans are going to reject this deal. This is the IBF swallowing its own BS. What a crock of PR nonsense.

Even if this went official and Pro badminton was 21x3 from now on ... I can't see for the life of me anyone at my local club buying into this crap, not that a random club matters - my point is that for the average player I dont think this is a desired change .... Canada has rejected this proposal so far as I know they are Not officially adopting this for National play... I'm sure there muse be other countries (even ones bigger in Badminton) who don't wish this either.

[merlin]

Funny thing - I was playing yesterday using the old scoring system. I will try to remember to use the new system next time I play.

We should all try the new system in our games, and then come back here.

[badrad]

i think in the long run, players will play the way they are most comfortable. over time, the small group of pencil pushers at the IBF will be off the council, and a new group will be cleaning up the mess this current group made. unfortunately, as history tends to perpetually repeat itself, this will likely happen again in another few years, with new group of over-zealous desk-jockeys, and we will have the same old discussions once again.

in the meantime, nothing has changed. there will not be a mass of new players flooding into the sport. there will be no budweiser sponsorship, or a super-bowl hype of any badminton event in North America...

it will simply be a few forgotten little people who tried making a change... a change that few people wanted... what a waste of time and manpower...

[DinkAlot]

If one day badminton matches at the highest level last only about 35 - 40 minutes, it's going to degenerate into an amateur sport.

The sad thing is, in the U.S., badminton is "basically" an amateur sport. :(

[DinkAlot]

I just vomited all over my keyboard....

LOL! Quite, an appropriate response. :p

[event]

The last paragraph reads:
" The event has received positive feedback from many people and although there are some quarters who have expressed alternative opinions, it seems that the overall consensus is that many have welcomed the new scoring system. Umpire Tomoharu Sano of Japan said: "The game is now very fast and the officials have to be very alert too at all times. It's an exciting change." "

Wow, so according to this IBF article, the new scoring format was welcomed by most people (overall consensus). But why can't they find a positive comment from the top players or coaches who are the people most qualified to give a professional opinion? Why can't they find a positive comment from the spectators who are the ones really concerned about the entertainment value of matches. No they have to get a comment from an UMPIRE!
Well, just look at the language of that highlighted text. it seems that the overall consensus is that many have welcomed : The deception is couched in 3 levels of uncertainty. Not most but many. Not a majority opinion or survey result but overall consensus and all that consensus is about is that many people welcomed it, not that the system is good. In other words, the people who may or may not have been polled didn't necessarily like it themselves, but rather they may have simply been of the opinion that many other people welcomed it. Think about it. You could talk to spectators and ask them whether they got the impression that many people in the IBF liked it and then come up with an overall consensus that many people in the IBF like the new system. Or perhaps there was an overall consensus within the IBF committee that not everyone hated it but rather that 23 people over in the corner (ie "many") welcomed this change. Finally, it only seems that this was the overall consensus. In other words, no one actually did any polling or otherwise had a reliable way of gauging the consensus. It tells you something when a writer has to build this much uncertainty into the language of a report. Then look at what the umpire actually said. They look like the words of someone who lives by the old adage "if you can't think of anything nice to say ..." He (she?) is trying so hard to find something positive in it. It's exciting...for an umpire. Because of the match? No, because the game moves so fast and the umpire has to be alert to keep from being confused.
Any comments from spectators with first hand experience? Anything heard through the grapevine? Anything other than IBF and media comments?I was watching the Korean nationals with several people with whom I normally play. I can say quite confidently that the overall consensus seemed to be that the doubles matches were too short, that 16-10 meant the game was already over, and that trying to figure out who should be serving was pointless.

[newjazz]

LOL! Quite, an appropriate response. :p

i read Taufik's response @ http://www.bolanews.com/edisi-cetak/bultang.htm

he said: “Satu gim hanya sepuluh menit, nggak sampai setengah jam pertandingan selesai. Enggak enak. Saya lebih suka menggunakan skor 15 seperti biasanya”
(one game completed in 10 minutes, and not more than half-an-hour the whole match completed. not interesting. I prefer 15 points system)


i think IBF so dumb stupid... :mad::mad:

it's true what CCSKAKI said... IBF never asked the players....
Taufik said: those ppl nv asked my opinion before... (which i assume: IBF nv ask all players)

[taneepak]

The IBF oficials are appointed and governed by a General Meeting attended by more than 150 country delegates. IBF officials come from almost all countries, from China to 'Tinbaktu". :D . The power to select also carries the power to sack, change, or a slap on the wrist. There are also powerful national badminton associations that can tell the IBF off. The final decision on the new system will be made by the IBF council, not one or two officials. In the council you have China, Japan, Korea, Indonesia, Malaysia, Denmark, USA, Canada, Australia, Nigeria, Sweden, England, and many others representing all the continents.
The best way to have your views heard is through your national association and they can find a way to cast their vote. This is how the system works. The power is with the grassroot associations, unless yoy feel that all your countries' representatives are crooks or corrupt. :D

[Pball]

well, if it is so welcomed... they never ask any opinion here (Philippines..). No one even uses it... no one even tried to use it.. you don't have to, to know its a load of crap.

in case the IBF is reading this...

your new scoring system is a load of skunk manure!!! :D

sorry for the outburst.. just can stand blatant lying .. and this new press release is just that or at the very least one sided reporting..

[taneepak]

It is the same with me. No one notified me let alone ask for my opinion. I had not even heard about it until now. Neither have I tried it. I guess in the scheme of things, I don't really count-for after all who am I? Until I become a member of the Hong Kong Badminton Association, I guess they won't even bother to hear me out.:D
I am sure the IBF Philippines council member Edgar Aglipay was in the know. Likewise, I am sure the players, officials, coaches, umpires, linesmen at the ongoing World Cup Championships knew about it. This is understandable, because these people do count as they are involved in this daring experiment. This way of doing things are very cost effective, not unlike sending out new prototype racquets for selective testers before finalizing the end product.

[CWB001]

It is the same with me. No one notified me let alone ask for my opinion. I had not even heard about it until now. ...... I guess in the scheme of things, I don't really count-for after all who am I? Until I become a member of the Hong Kong Badminton Association, I guess they won't even bother to hear me out..

How come you have been arguing in favour of the new system over the last few days then?

And if one person counts for so little why do you argue that others that oppose this silly new system (that is so obviously dangerous to the sport) should make their views felt as individuals?

The sort of weasel statements quoted by the original poster show us just how much of an independent evaluation of the experiment can be expected from the IBF. And also why no evaluation criteria have been published. There are none - this change will be bulldozed through regardless.

[ccskaki]

And also why no evaluation criteria have been published. There are none - this change will be bulldozed through regardless.

Yeap. The so-called "experimenting the new system" is just a show. IBF is not open-minded about the result of experiment because they have already decided that they WANT to implement it.

[Brave_Turtle]

Well, my view on this new scoring system is: Games are way too short especially doubles!

[cooler]

well, if it is so welcomed... they never ask any opinion here (Philippines..). No one even uses it... no one even tried to use it.. you don't have to, to know its a load of crap.

in case the IBF is reading this...

your new scoring system is a load of skunk manure!!! :D

sorry for the outburst.. just can stand blatant lying .. and this new press release is just that or at the very least one sided reporting..

LOL, that phrase remind me of corporate management decision making process.


Club Organizers to Federation VPs: the players say the propose plan is foul smelling and reek of skunk manure.

Federation VPs to Council President: the people say the plan has a strong pungent smell like fementing organic compose.

Council President to IBF Chairman: the people say the plan is like a strong fertilizer.

IBF Chairman: The IBF had listened to the people and this plan will provide nutrient for fantastic growth. I declare the propose plan as corporate policy.

[taneepak]

How come you have been arguing in favour of the new system over the last few days then?

And if one person counts for so little why do you argue that others that oppose this silly new system (that is so obviously dangerous to the sport) should make their views felt as individuals?

The sort of weasel statements quoted by the original poster show us just how much of an independent evaluation of the experiment can be expected from the IBF. And also why no evaluation criteria have been published. There are none - this change will be bulldozed through regardless.

What I have been trying to fight for is the right to be tried out first before rubbishing the idea. This is how we progress. The chosen body-yes, chosen by your country's delegates-comes up with a proposal, an action plan for a trial period, and then a decision phase to adopt or reject. This is the due process.
A part of me tells me that a fairer playing field would allow each player to have an equal number of serves (or as equal as possible), something similar to today's table tennis, and that points can be scored from two points of view-from the server and from the receiver.
No, I did not in the least feel pissed off when I was not consulted about the change. On the contrary, if you read carefully, the real message is that it is as it should be. It would be inappropriate and a colossal waste of money to inform the badminton fans, players, and supporters of the world about the change directly and individually.
The final decision will be made by the IBF council members. Now if your country's council member votes for the new system, why the hell did you vote for him? It is more appropriate that you and all the badminton clubs in your country contact him to reject the idea. This way your grievance can be better directed. In this forum it is like a shortgun blast that hits nothing but air. It is not wasted though. Just good to talk about but not an appropriate channel to swing the vote. :D

[taneepak]

Yeap. The so-called "experimenting the new system" is just a show. IBF is not open-minded about the result of experiment because they have already decided that they WANT to implement it.

Well, why not do something about it? You can call up Singapore's IBF council representative Steven Yeo at +65 63441773 and state your case. Steven is a very powerful council member. :D BTW, Punch Gunalan alone cannot make the decision. He doesn't even have a casting vote when votes are tied. Do you have any more democratic ways to vote?

[FEND.]

mmm.

Very 'colourful' comments our members have expressed....

Hell why worry bout it. Just go on with your daily lives and play badminton with the ol 15 point system. If you don't like the new system, why not everyone call steven yeo's telephone number. I'm sure he'll crawl back to the IBF council with eye bags after a large bombardment on his mobile phone by angry supporters of the fans.

Lets try it with other members too :D

[Wong8Egg]

Quote from the interview at World cup final

XXF: I thinik I will support the 21 point system
LD: The 21 point system is bringing impact to some of the players, IE: BCL

[taneepak]

mmm.

Very 'colourful' comments our members have expressed....

Hell why worry bout it. Just go on with your daily lives and play badminton with the ol 15 point system. If you don't like the new system, why not everyone call steven yeo's telephone number. I'm sure he'll crawl back to the IBF council with eye bags after a large bombardment on his mobile phone by angry supporters of the fans.

Lets try it with other members too :D

For Australians they have an even more powerful council member, a vice president, Robin Bryant. Why not use him as a lightning rod? Talk the talk, and walk the walk. Have the guts to do it the right way. But, try to build up your case on a more solid foundation. Shooting the idea down before it is even tested will only weaken your case, because it will be treated as a "spoilt" vote. If you are a national association member, a top national player, a national coach, a national or international accredited umpire you should know how to go about this.:D

[taneepak]

Quote from the interview at World cup final

XXF: I thinik I will support the 21 point system
LD: The 21 point system is bringing impact to some of the players, IE: BCL

What will determine the fate of the new system is the feedback they get from the relevant bodies that run such "trial" competitions. One or two players opinions will not be decisive. It will be a majority decision.

[ants]

Will see how it goes. This is the 1st official tournament that is using the 21 points systems. I'm sure there will be many more feedbacks from both players and official. If is does no good to the game.. i'm queit sure that the game will eventually go back to the old scoring method.

[CWB001]

What will determine the fate of the new system is the feedback they get from the relevant bodies that run such "trial" competitions. One or two players opinions will not be decisive. It will be a majority decision.

You continue to blissfully ignore the fact that there is no mechanism for such a consultation or any criteria for any such evaluation and therefore no input to any vote except the opinions of the IBF members.

You must be very naive if the think that democracy has anything to do with this - autocracy is the method in use.

[taneepak]

You continue to blissfully ignore the fact that there is no mechanism for such a consultation or any criteria for any such evaluation and therefore no input to any vote except the opinions of the IBF members.

You must be very naive if the think that democracy has anything to do with this - autocracy is the method in use.

There will be enough trial matches using the new scoring system between now and the 2006 Thomas & Uber Cup for all the more than 150 member delegates from all the continents to vote yes or no at the AGM to be held in Japan after the Thomas/Uber Cup. The decision to vote yes or no is at the hands of these 150+ members, not a bunch of autocrats.
Or do you think that even these 150 votes representing all the recognized badminton confederations in the world are autocrats? Maybe you should be there and demand that the IBF send out millions of voting papers to all and sundry for a popular vote. Even the president of the U.S. is not elected on a popular vote but by an electoral college. You choose to call such a system autocratic? What then do you think the IBF should do? :rolleyes:

[CWB001]

There will be enough trial matches using the new scoring system between now and the 2006 Thomas & Uber Cup for all the more than 150 member delegates from all the continents to vote yes or no at the AGM to be held in Japan after the Thomas/Uber Cup. The decision to vote yes or no is at the hands of these 150+ members, not a bunch of autocrats.
Or do you think that even these 150 votes representing all the recognized badminton confederations in the world are autocrats? Maybe you should be there and demand that the IBF send out millions of voting papers to all and sundry for a popular vote. Even the president of the U.S. is not elected on a popular vote but by an electoral college. You choose to call such a system autocratic? What then do you think the IBF should do? :rolleyes:

Hmm. Autocrats are recognised by their behaviour not by the way they were elected.

[taneepak]

Hmm. Autocrats are recognised by their behaviour not by the way they were elected.

Lets call a spade a spade. What is wrong with this 150+ voting system? There are Englishmen, Chinamen, Americans, Australians, Indians, Canadians, East Europeons, Singaporeans, Malaysians, Japanese, Koreans, Indonesians, Danish Vikings, Thais, and almost all countries you care to count who are going to have the final say. Are you saying your fellow Englishmen are as autocratic as Punch Gunalan? Again, what do you suggest? Printing 100 million Yes/No ballot papers and then sending them out to whoever you can get hold of to vote? I will bet my bottom dollar that the 150+ votes will not only make a mockery of your 100 million voting papers, but surprise, surprise, will even be closer to what the badminton fraternity wants, and much more cost effective. :D

[CWB001]

Lets call a spade a spade. What is wrong with this 150+ voting system? There are Englishmen, Chinamen, Americans, Australians, Indians, Canadians, East Europeons, Singaporeans, Malaysians, Japanese, Koreans, Indonesians, Danish Vikings, Thais, and almost all countries you care to count who are going to have the final say. Are you saying your fellow Englishmen are as autocratic as Punch Gunalan? Again, what do you suggest? Printing 100 million Yes/No ballot papers and then sending them out to whoever you can get hold of to vote? I will bet my bottom dollar that the 150+ votes will not only make a mockery of your 100 million voting papers, but surprise, surprise, will even be closer to what the badminton fraternity wants, and much more cost effective. :D


Are you a member of the IBF or do you just gullible enough to swallow everything they say?

[DinkAlot]

in case the IBF is reading this...

your new scoring system is a load of skunk manure!!! :D



PBall, please tell us how you really feel. ;) :D :p :D :D :p :p :p

[DinkAlot]

Are you a member of the IBF or do you just gullible enough to swallow everything they say?

:eek: :eek: :eek: LMAO! :p :p :p :D :D :D :D :D

[taneepak]

Are you a member of the IBF or do you just gullible enough to swallow everything they say?

No, I just want to give everyone a fair trial. Don't you?

[ants]

Sometimes views expressed are just not enough. Maybe someone can do something about it?

[jump_smash]

I agree, happend before with 5x7, will probably happen again.

As I have said previously it is not about making changes... it is about properly promoting the sport!


i think in the long run, players will play the way they are most comfortable. over time, the small group of pencil pushers at the IBF will be off the council, and a new group will be cleaning up the mess this current group made. unfortunately, as history tends to perpetually repeat itself, this will likely happen again in another few years, with new group of over-zealous desk-jockeys, and we will have the same old discussions once again.

in the meantime, nothing has changed. there will not be a mass of new players flooding into the sport. there will be no budweiser sponsorship, or a super-bowl hype of any badminton event in North America...

it will simply be a few forgotten little people who tried making a change... a change that few people wanted... what a waste of time and manpower...

[jump_smash]

Thanks, don't you think we have already dicussed this, put forward our view points? Some people are just yes people!


For Australians they have an even more powerful council member, a vice president, Robin Bryant. Why not use him as a lightning rod? Talk the talk, and walk the walk. Have the guts to do it the right way. But, try to build up your case on a more solid foundation. Shooting the idea down before it is even tested will only weaken your case, because it will be treated as a "spoilt" vote. If you are a national association member, a top national player, a national coach, a national or international accredited umpire you should know how to go about this.:D

[manduki]

We're basically repeating the same thing over and over again so i didnt bother reading after page one so if we moved onto a new topic, forgive me.

Since it is evident that this new scoring system is not very popular in both the professional world and the amateur world, i think that IBF will change it back eventually.

I amcurrently trying to persuade my friends that badminton is challenging to both the mental and physical body but this new scoring system makes it like a wussier version of volleyball and brings it down to the standards of table tennis. Personally I am not a strong player and I generally become more offensive during my serve because I have nothing to loose. However, with this new scoring system, I feel intimidated to be offensive during the game in fear of a frame shot.

My main point is this. Badminton is already the second most popular sport in the world before this system. The badminton tournaments gain enough support as is to keep the sport favourable. Why change the fundamental rules of the game in order to make it even more friendly to the world?

[cooler]

:eek: :eek: :eek: LMAO! :p :p :p :D :D :D :D :D

hey, wait up and smell the ........ (and it isn't the coffee :p )

[DinkAlot]

hey, wait up and smell the ........ (and it isn't the coffee :p )

Wait up? LOL! You're the one that needs some coffee Cooler. :p

[FEND.]

Why change the fundamental rules of the game in order to make it even more friendly to the world?

I don't know, prolly the IBF wants to show the world how it the game can be shat on with the new shaky game rules the retarded and idiotic people at the IBF can think of.

[franxon]

Try having a look at the latest article on their official website:

http://www.intbadfed.org/Portal/desktopdefault.aspx?tabid=10&ItemID=1903

The last paragraph reads:
" The event has received positive feedback from many people and although there are some quarters who have expressed alternative opinions, it seems that the overall consensus is that many have welcomed the new scoring system. Umpire Tomoharu Sano of Japan said: "The game is now very fast and the officials have to be very alert too at all times. It's an exciting change." "

Wow, so according to this IBF article, the new scoring format was welcomed by most people (overall consensus). But why can't they find a positive comment from the top players or coaches who are the people most qualified to give a professional opinion? Why can't they find a positive comment from the spectators who are the ones really concerned about the entertainment value of matches. No they have to get a comment from an UMPIRE!

The reason is because the truth is that most players didn't like the new scoring system. Just read your newspapers (not written by IBF).

IBF must be desperate. Someone must have some personal agenda behind all this.

well, i almost totally agree with what ccskaki feels. and i'll add some more here.

Taufik clearly expressed that he doesn't like the new scoring system at all. so did many other pros.

chinese national coach Li Yongbo made a very negative comment on the new scoring system (in chinese), he is that kind of guy who always means what he says and says what he means.

so much for responses from the pro line.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

(after i finished what i felt like to write, i found it toooooo long, so i cut it into fragments, here you go)

[franxon]

as for us, WHO CARES? ANYONE OF YOU ARE PLAYING THE NEW SCORING SYSTEM? none around me even bothered to give it a try.

IBF hasn't done anything positively impressive these years. all has been done is embarrassing themselves, the 7 point scoring system for example. and it came again in the form of 21 points.

and badminton is going to be kicked out of Olympus Games all thanks to IBF.

in fact, if IBF dies tomorrow, i'll still love this game, if not more; i'll still love the players, if not more; the players will still be playing, if not more and better. and the game will still be loved by many people, if not more.

SO, WHAT THE HECK DO WE NEED IBF AND WHAT THE HECK THEY ARE DOING THERE?

so much for complaining.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[twobeer]

First off all, as I stated before.. Some ideas can be refuted in theory and doesn't NEED to be tested.. Also if IBF really wanted to "trial" this new system.. Why start with the big toournaments? Why not make for example US (or whatever porblem "market" they try to address) trial it an if it works there maybe it could be considered internationally.. It doesn't make sense to start messing with things at the top level just for "fun"..

And why 21x3 as you indicated there are almost infinitive variations of scoring and who's to serve rules.. I don't think we need to try out each and every possible combination...At least not if we cannot say the 15x3 scoring is
a major problem!!

I agree with you that petitions, etc should be sent to the local IBF guys to make em know how we feel :)

Cheers,
Twobeer


What I have been trying to fight for is the right to be tried out first before rubbishing the idea. This is how we progress. The chosen body-yes, chosen by your country's delegates-comes up with a proposal, an action plan for a trial period, and then a decision phase to adopt or reject. This is the due process.
A part of me tells me that a fairer playing field would allow each player to have an equal number of serves (or as equal as possible), something similar to today's table tennis, and that points can be scored from two points of view-from the server and from the receiver.
No, I did not in the least feel pissed off when I was not consulted about the change. On the contrary, if you read carefully, the real message is that it is as it should be. It would be inappropriate and a colossal waste of money to inform the badminton fans, players, and supporters of the world about the change directly and individually.
The final decision will be made by the IBF council members. Now if your country's council member votes for the new system, why the hell did you vote for him? It is more appropriate that you and all the badminton clubs in your country contact him to reject the idea. This way your grievance can be better directed. In this forum it is like a shortgun blast that hits nothing but air. It is not wasted though. Just good to talk about but not an appropriate channel to swing the vote. :D

[franxon]

let's back to the point.

the main reason for the 21 point scoring system is a predictable game play time. and they are pretty wrong here.

as the most comparable game, tennis doesn't have a predictable game play time at all (men's long final (5th) set instead of tie break makes the game even longer now). what's worse, the four Grand Slams are all open-door. people don't mind even sitting in the rain in the midnight watching the game which they love, not knowing when it ends. that's the charm of the game. countless classic long-winded matches make the best part of tennis history.

people come across oceans and mountains to the game they like, people go away from the game they don't like even if it's delivered to door.

so, unpredictable game time ain't a problem for badminton at all. and don't blame the unpredictable game time when you failed to get more people love this game.

well, if you insist, that unpredictable game time IS INDEED a big problem, 21-point ain't the solution at all. here is the reason.

take football and basketball (NBA) for example. they have relatively more predictable game time. football two halves 90 minutes plus the break in between. additional 30 min and penalty kicking for no-draw games. for NBA 4 quarters 48 minutes plus 3 breaks, 6 full time-out and 2 short for each team. unlimited OT until there is a winner. it can easily go beyond 2 hours.

you see the difference?

yes, games have to be predictably LONG, not predictably SHORT.

you hardly find any game that is as short as half an hour. that simply doesn't make it a game: no enough time to get the audience into the game. even for snooker or billard, multi frames ensure long enough game time. it is kinda psycology thing. have you ever watched a movie that is one hour long (short)? that simply doesn't make it a movie (in the common sense).

games are like stories, catch and run, and you need time to develop the story line and the ups and downs. that's what games are all about: the UNPREDICTABILITY. and that's why people feel games are INTERESTING.

i just wanna give you another example: the formula 1. a sports with a very predictable race time. but it's damn long if you don't like it.

21-point scoring system not only makes the game predictably short, but also makes the game itself predictable. it's killing this game.

AFTERWORD:

you may not like the examples i give hereand may think they are not comparable. well, tennis, football, NBA and F1 are highly commercialized sports. badminton is just the opposite. and that's why IBF is struggling. COMMERCIALIZATION IS THE ONLY WAY OUT.

[ccskaki]

let's back to the point.

the main reason for the 21 point scoring system is a predictable game play time. and they are pretty wrong here.

as the most comparable game, tennis doesn't have a predictable game play time at all (men's long final (5th) set instead of tie break makes the game even longer now). what's worse, the four Grand Slams are all open-door. people don't mind even sitting in the rain in the midnight watching the game which they love, not knowing when it ends. that's the charm of the game. countless classic long-winded matches make the best part of tennis history.

people come across oceans and mountains to the game they like, people go away from the game they don't like even if it's delivered to door.

so, unpredictable game time ain't a problem for badminton at all. and don't blame the unpredictable game time when you failed to get more people love this game.

well, if you insist, that unpredictable game time IS INDEED a big problem, 21-point ain't the solution at all. here is the reason.

take football and basketball (NBA) for example. they have relatively more predictable game time. football two halves 90 minutes plus the break in between. additional 30 min and penalty kicking for no-draw games. for NBA 4 quarters 48 minutes plus 3 breaks, 6 full time-out and 2 short for each team. unlimited OT until there is a winner. it can easily go beyond 2 hours.

you see the difference?

yes, games have to be predictably LONG, not predictably SHORT.

you hardly find any game that is as short as half an hour. that simply doesn't make it a game: no enough time to get the audience into the game. even for snooker or billard, multi frames ensure long enough game time. it is kinda psycology thing. have you ever watched a movie that is one hour long (short)? that simply doesn't make it a movie (in the common sense).

games are like stories, catch and run, and you need time to develop the story line and the ups and downs. that's what games are all about: the UNPREDICTABILITY. and that's why people feel games are INTERESTING.

i just wanna give you another example: the formula 1. a sports with a very predictable race time. but it's damn long if you don't like it.

21-point scoring system not only makes the game predictably short, but also makes the game itself predictable. it's killing this game.

AFTERWORD:

you may not like the examples i give hereand may think they are not comparable. well, tennis, football, NBA and F1 are highly commercialized sports. badminton is just the opposite. and that's why IBF is struggling. COMMERCIALIZATION IS THE ONLY WAY OUT.

You said it best. I always wanted to explain why it is not good to shorten a game for the sake of making the duration predictabe. You put it nicely.

Punch Gunalan doesn't get it. After the recent world cup, he said that the new system was a success because it made the game durations predictable and most games finished within 40 minutes. From what he said, it is clear that to them, making a game duration predictable is THE ultimate target. But why? Because he (they) believes that a predictable duration is good for promoting the game. They are so wrong.

I believe IBF is getting everything wrong. The main problem is not with the scoring format. Why? Let's say after many many experiments with different scoring formats (7x5, 21x3, 31x3, 3x13 etc) and IBF still can't increase the popularity of the game, what do they do next? Hey let's change the size of the court! No effect? Let's change the racquet! Make the racquet two handed just like tennis! Let's change the shuttlecock! Remove the feathers and make the round part larger just like a tennis ball!

IBF will get to no where if they think changing the game will make the game more popular. It's not the original game anymore. IBF is totally missing the point: The best and only way to promote a game is through marketing exercises, not by changing the game.

The plain and simple truth is that IBF svcks at marketing. The solution is that they need to employ true marketing talents and professionals.

[cooler]

Wait up? LOL! You're the one that needs some coffee Cooler. :p

i seem to stumble and trip over alot when i'm about to smash on your half court lifts :o

[ants]

Well since so many pll talk about how IBF sucks etc... and no respond from IBF about it. I see if i can talk to the VP about it the non-official way.

[wood_22_chuck]

Excellent, ants! :D

Try not to use the "skunk manure" quote, by the way.

-dave

[ants]

Excellent, ants! :D

Try not to use the "skunk manure" quote, by the way.

-dave


Hahah..if you talk to those pll in the streets , you may do that. Anyway its not professional if we talk to other pll like that or by using that kind of quotes. I'm sure you wouldn't like it too right?.

[Double_Player]

IBF method is similar like those of "arab democracy" or "security services" by the mafia. simply, there is no such things. it means dictatorship.

[DinkAlot]

i seem to stumble and trip over alot when i'm about to smash on your half court lifts :o

LMAO! Sir, you obviously do not know me if you think I do half court lifts. :p

Back to topic: After watching many videos of the new scoring, I hope they can revert back to the old. The matches are done way too fast and there's really no chance for a team behind to come back. :(

[keeprocking]

Back to topic: After watching many videos of the new scoring, I hope they can revert back to the old. The matches are done way too fast and there's really no chance for a team behind to come back. :(

I hope so too. I was watching a doubles match between Cai/Fu and Lun/Eri yesterday and boy was I disappointed. The games just zipped by and I feel the players hardly got any chance to fight back. And moreover, whats up with the new serving rule ? Its as if they are trying to make the doubles more like the singles.

I hope the old point system is enforced soon to make badminton more enjoyable for everyone.

[twobeer]

let's back to the point.
Good post Franxon! Couldn't agree more!

/Twobeer

[franxon]

lemme make a more constructive post after all the negative.

i'll put my conclusion before i start it: commercialisation is the only way out.

i kept asking myself why IBF wants to keep badminton matches short and predictable duration?

I got two answers which make sense to me.

reason 1: players have more energy per minute to use in the game, making the game more aggressive.

reason 2: the commercial satelite rentals become more affordable for more sports channels when telecasting badminton live. and more affordable => more sports channels telecasting => more area coverage => more people watching => more people will like it.

it doesn't matter if these are the true reasons behind, they are the true consequence of the change anyway.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

reason 1 reminds me of one of the major difference between world basketball and NBA: there're two halves in world basketball and 4 quarters in NBA.

the NBA bosses made it 4 quarters just because of a simplest reason: more fragments, more breaks; more breaks more commercial time; more commercial time, more money. but do your best to remain your audience in their sofa not touching their remote controls. because of the same reason came in the 6 full time-outs and 2 short time-outs for each coach.

besides, more breaks, more rest time for the players and more energy recovered and therefore more exciting games.

extend the commercial breaks, not shorten the match duration. that's where money comes in.

perhaps a 21x5 format would be a better idea? i'm not too sure about that.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

again i'll use tennis as the example. unpredictably long telecasting time is more severe for tennis if it is indeed a problem. but i bet those telecasters would be saying, during a match, "that's a damn good return Rafael, be tough on Roger, make the match tight. and as long as possible. who cares about the telecasting cost?"

Is ATP worried about the damn unpredictable long match time? you bet. if they're not proud of it!

as we all know, badminton is certainly an interesting enough sports that deserves more. what IBF needs to do instead would be: go out and get more people sit down and watch and develop an affection towards badminton. and go out and get more sponsors and put another zero to the prize money (at the dollar's position not the cent's). easy to say than do, huh? :rolleyes:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

[libra]

After thinking about the comments made in this thread for a little while...

I give credit to Franxon for backing his views up with very reasonable examples. Fair enough if people prefer the old 15 point system. I must say even I prefer the old system but some of the other posters - we'll call them 'IBF bashers' - are in my opinion being selfish.

Why? Arguments like 'I wasn't consulted on this issue' and 'Don't change the system' (read I don't want to change) sound to me like they are made by egoist who with narrow-minded thinking.

Who would think to consult you if the IBF don't know who you are? Stop your whinging and do something about it if you seriously think your lively hood will be affected.

I agree with Tenepak in giving it a chance before bashing anything new into the grave. Tenepak has just put the same idea in a more deplomatic way.

Seriously, I think IBF is doing its best to promote the sport, maybe it isn't the right way (time will tell) but what if it is?

FYI: Volleyball and table tennis seem to have settled on their new scoring systems without too much fuss.

I'm not saying this is definately the way to do but if someone has a better suggestion and is willing to do something about it be my guest, I'll even support you by signing your piece of paper of a proposal but if not non-constructive criticism isn't the answer.

[twobeer]

After thinking about the comments made in this thread for a little while...

I give credit to Franxon for backing his views up with very reasonable examples. Fair enough if people prefer the old 15 point system. I must say even I prefer the old system but some of the other posters - we'll call them 'IBF bashers' - are in my opinion being selfish.

Why? Arguments like 'I wasn't consulted on this issue' and 'Don't change the system' (read I don't want to change) sound to me like they are made by egoist who with narrow-minded thinking.

Who would think to consult you if the IBF don't know who you are? Stop your whinging and do something about it if you seriously think your lively hood will be affected.

I agree with Tenepak in giving it a chance before bashing anything new into the grave. Tenepak has just put the same idea in a more deplomatic way.

Seriously, I think IBF is doing its best to promote the sport, maybe it isn't the right way (time will tell) but what if it is?

FYI: Volleyball and table tennis seem to have settled on their new scoring systems without too much fuss.

I'm not saying this is definately the way to do but if someone has a better suggestion and is willing to do something about it be my guest, I'll even support you by signing your piece of paper of a proposal but if not non-constructive criticism isn't the answer.

I can understand that people feel upset with IBF with short notice changing the rules of the game fundamentaly without more local-testing or research.. Using major tournaments as "experiments"...

I would suspect the reactions would be pretty much the same if IBF decided to try out syntetic shuttles in all major tournaments for a few months...
You can then easily dissmiss these peoples personal negative experience and opinions about this as "non-constructive" critizism...

I think it is unfair to dismiss anyone who feels the game is good as it is today.. and doesn't need to be changed in order to market it and popularize it..as non-constructive :-)

I feel there are lots of things that could be done and a lot of constructive ideas that have been put forward, to for example allow more ad-breaks etc..

But most activities to drive money to the sport, get it more known, get more air-time etc...Are HARD... not EASY... So my personal suspicsion is that IBF is looking for EASY solutions.. That holy-rule-grail that will suddenly boost the popularity of badminton by a magnitude without any real costs or work associtaed with it (apart from a document signed between the IBF members)..
I got this feeling first when the 7x5 scoring was tried...

You could of course be of the opinion that.. lets try it... Even if you don't beleive there is a golden pot at the end of the rainbow.. we should give it a chance...You can't know for sure untile you've tried..

But I see a danger if we every year.. is trying a slight change of rules or changing the scoring system thinking.. This is the one.. This is the one that will turn everything around :P . It is so easy that we get caught in a destructive thinking of trying to find out "what is wrong with the game". Instead of being proud of a great game with great rules.. and focus on how to sell Badminton.. Not how to change badminton...

/Twobeer

[Brave_Turtle]

and focus on how to sell Badminton.. Not how to change badminton...

/Twobeer

I like this! :cool:

[Morten]

Just read that in a protest to the new scoring system DBF, Danish Badminton Federation, has announced that they will play best of 3*15. As I see it IBF could learn a lot from tennis and soccer and see how they promote the sport.

[Morten]

forgot to mention it was in Copenhagen Masters :D

[DinkAlot]

Just read that in a protest to the new scoring system DBF, Danish Badminton Federation, has announced that they will play best of 3*15. As I see it IBF could learn a lot from tennis and soccer and see how they promote the sport.

Good! Maybe that will catch the IBF's attention. :p

[DinkAlot]

Originally Posted by twobeer

and focus on how to sell Badminton.. Not how to change badminton...

/Twobeer



I like this! :cool:

Me three! :D

[MikeJ]

Just read that in a protest to the new scoring system DBF, Danish Badminton Federation, has announced that they will play best of 3*15. As I see it IBF could learn a lot from tennis and soccer and see how they promote the sport.

Great!!!! :D wonderful news!!!

[franxon]

Like I said earlier in this thread, what can not survive will die.

so if the new scoring system stands, it is good. if it is not good enough, no worries, it will die out automatically and the old system will still rock.

fret not, just give it enough time to die. :D

if you don't let IBF try, they always feel ichy about a new scoring system, and they have the power so sooner or later they'll try.

so just let them try and let them learn from failures. and next time they will be more careful embarrassing themselves.

[kanive]

Like I said earlier in this thread, what can not survive will die.

so if the new scoring system stands, it is good. if it is not good enough, no worries, it will die out automatically and the old system will still rock.

fret not, just give it enough time to die. :D

if you don't let IBF try, they always feel ichy about a new scoring system, and they have the power so sooner or later they'll try.

so just let them try and let them learn from failures. and next time they will be more careful embarrassing themselves.

It won't die by itself. It must be helped along to its demise.

IBF did try this kind of thing before, they failed, they embarrassed themselves, and as far as anybody can tell, haven't learnt from it.

I think rally21 has a place -- and that place is in club play, in C and D singles tournaments, and in training practice, say if you are playing 2 on 1. It should not be mandatory, it should not be seen in a top-class tournament, and it definitely should not have been imposed on us in such a high-handed way, even as a trial.

[taneepak]

Just read that in a protest to the new scoring system DBF, Danish Badminton Federation, has announced that they will play best of 3*15. As I see it IBF could learn a lot from tennis and soccer and see how they promote the sport.

If what you say is true don't you think it is rather childish for DBF to specifically say they are doing this as a protest to the new scoring system? Or are you doing your own interpretation?
As a matter of fact, all IBF sanctioned matches that carry world ranking points must use the new system.

[wedgewenis]

why is it childish?

there isn't anything childish about standing up for what you know to be the truth...........

[DinkAlot]

why is it childish?

there isn't anything childish about standing up for what you know to be the truth...........

Agree, there's nothing childish about it. It's the DBF's way of protesting the new scoring. That's all.

[MikeJ]

I agree. :D There's nothing childish about what DBF is doing. More power to DBF! :D

[2NDround]

Totally in agreement! DBF and majority of the badminton community probably realise what IBF do not - change what is fundamental to the game and its no longer the same game. Call it tableton or tenniston, it is no longer badminton.

It is very painful to see taneepak keep on defending what is undefensible. He must be one courageous guy!

[ants]

Since we can't do much about IBF's decision. What we can do as individual is to promote badminton to more people. No point complaining even it is good to voice our opinions. We have to start at the micro level. Each of us do our part in the sports of badminton.

[taneepak]

why is it childish?

there isn't anything childish about standing up for what you know to be the truth...........

Frankly, I don't believe the DBF deliberately set out to use the 15-0 system as a protest from the DBF. If they publicly did so then it would be childish, which I don't believe they intend to. Saying it publicly for this tournament would be tantamount to playing any IBF sanctioned matches and using the old 15-0 system in Denmark before the critical vote in May 2006.
What I am saying is the DBF's Copenhagen Masters is being "hijacked" to serve some points of view here. If not, can anyone quote any actual comments from the DBF officials that the DBF is protesting against the new IBF scoring system by using the old system for this tournament?:D

[Pball]

LOL, that phrase remind me of corporate management decision making process.


Club Organizers to Federation VPs: the players say the propose plan is foul smelling and reek of skunk manure.

Federation VPs to Council President: the people say the plan has a strong pungent smell like fementing organic compose.

Council President to IBF Chairman: the people say the plan is like a strong fertilizer.

IBF Chairman: The IBF had listened to the people and this plan will provide nutrient for fantastic growth. I declare the propose plan as corporate policy.


LOL. This made me laugh out loud... reminded me of several big corporations..

[Pball]

Excellent, ants! :D

Try not to use the "skunk manure" quote, by the way.

-dave

Ahaha.. somehow I'm getting the feeling, that post is going to bite me in the behind somewhere down the line... :rolleyes:

[cooler]

Brits fly flag for jazzed-up game

Duncan Mackay
Sunday January 22, 2006
The Observer


For most of the UK's 26 sports present in the programme, the 2012 Olympics in London offers a unique development opportunity. From archery to wrestling, all are already drawing up plans to take advantage of the chance that has landed in their collective laps. Things are already coming together very nicely in badminton, thanks to the continued success enjoyed by Olympic silver medallists Gail Emms and Nathan Robertson, as well as to other planned innovations, ensuring that the profile of the sport is higher than it has ever been.

The feel-good factor was clearly in evidence here at the National Indoor Arena in Birmingham at the All England Open as Emms and Robertson reached their second consecutive final with a comfortable 15-12, 15-4 victory over the Indonesian pair of Nova Widianto and Lilyana Natsir to set themselves up as favourites today to retain the title they won last year.
The raucous atmosphere created by the capacity crowd of 4,500 was out of keeping with the genteel image most people have of the sport. Emms and Robertson have been critical that, since Athens, rather than capitalise on their newly created media profile, the sport's officials in Britain have largely focused on development at the expense of marketing. But with the emergence of players like Rajiv Ouseph, who in 2005 became the first English player for 20 years to win the European junior men's singles title, and who should be at his peak for 2012, it is a policy that may yield spectacular results.

'We recognise that badminton has an old 'church hall' image of being played by white middle-class people of a certain age,' said Jon Austin, the elite programme manager for Badminton England. 'One of our aims is to redress this situation. As a sport, we have had, until recently, a very low media profile, but with the success and image of Emms and Robertson we've been able to move quickly with limited resources.'

Officials hope the new scoring system to be introduced by the International Badminton Federation next month will help to make it more attractive to television. The traditional three games with the first to 15 is to be dropped and replaced by a new best-of-three, first-to-21-points scoring system. Also under the revised system, points will be scored on every rally and not, as at present, by the serving side only. 'The IBF have received a lot of complaints from TV companies stating that they are not able to allocate some form of timing to badminton matches because at the moment a match can last from 15 minutes to two hours,' said Punch Gunalan, Deputy President of the IBF. Badminton owes its place in the Olympics largely due to Sir Craig Reedie, one of the architects of London's sucessful bid, and a member of the International Olympic Committee. As a former leader of the IBF, Reedie orchestrated the campaign that saw it introduced for the 1992 Olympics in Barcelona, where, mainly thanks to its huge popularity in Asia, it drew the largest television audiences for any sport.

Reedie approves of the recent jazzing up of badminton. 'I watched the world championships in Anaheim on television, and there were all sorts of innovations,' he said. 'I thought it was exciting. The sport has to keep up with the best methods of promoting itself - end of story.'

[White_Gemini91]

IBF should have some wise opinions and decision... I think that the IBF should ask more players like us, AK team ppl whom alot of players hate the new scoring system and really prefers the old one~

[CkcJsm]

i dont like the new scoring system, the old one is much better!

[White_Gemini91]

yea! exactly!!!

[KazeCloud]

I love the new scoring system. Why? Because I can never make points if I serve. X_X

Somebody please tell me what I do wrong when I do that.

[wing-omega5-0]

I think the new scoring system isn't a REALLY bad thing...However, I really do miss the strokes of genius that players had back then. They seem too afraid to take risks and make the game more entertaining for us to watch now. Everyone has to play SO safe.