Rally-piont system is better than traditional one, at least in controlling playing time. But 3x21 is not good. I think the IBF should use 5x15, the reason is as follows:

1) more like traditional point system;
2) adding more time for advertesment; and
3) in favor of controlling playing time for team event.

In table tennis, the ITTF use 7x11 for the individual event and 5x11 for the team event. So the IBF should use 5x15 for the individual event and 3x15 for the team event.

If the IBF uses 3x15 in team event, the Sudirman Cup will spend no more than 3 hours, e.g.

Xd 3x15 about 35 minutes;
MS 3x15 about 35 minutes;
WS 3x15 about 35 minutes;
MD 3x15 about 35 minutes;
WD 3x15 about 35 minutes;
total about 3 hours (max).

As for T&UC, I think the IBF should use troditional format - best of 9, and every set use 3x15, and two Cups will spend no more than 5 hours respectively, e.g.

singles 3x15 about 35 minutes;
doubles 3x15 about 35 minutes;
singles 3x15 about 35 minutes;
doubles 3x15 about 35 minutes;
singles 3x15 about 35 minutes;
doubles 3x15 about 35 minutes;
singles 3x15 about 35 minutes;
doubles 3x15 about 35 minutes;
singles 3x15 about 35 minutes;
total about 5 hours (max).

The play order for two cups should be as follows:
If:
Team A: singles player A, B, and C doubles a and b
Team B: singles player X, Y, and Z doubles x and y

the order is as follows:
S A-X
D a-x
S B-Y
D b-y
S C-Z
D a-y
S A-Y
D b-x
S B-X
Any team can send their players or pairs not according to World Ranking.

You seem to have missed the fundamental argument that it is RALLY POINT scoring itself that is the major change. The number of points in a game is of much less importance to the character of badminton than the concept that you cannot score if you are not serving.

That and 15 points rally point is insanely fast.

I'm not sure there is much difference in time.

In a 3x21 game you can win after 42 rallies (ie 2-0). In a 5x15 game you can win in 45 rallies so the time difference isn't so different. 5x15 does allow the person who goes 0-1 down a better chance of a fightback. One of the comments made by players at the recent England v Denmark friendly was that the 3x21 system did not allow chance for the losing player/team to make a comeback.

I think what you say about 3x15 really can't work as that requires the winner to merely win 30 rallies. Those games will be over in no time.

I know it all gets more complicated if there is a fightback and it gets to a 3rd game etc but I can't see that timewise there is much difference. Just my opinion!

Fightsbacks are the thrill and joy of badminton, it is a tragedy to take them away. Fightbacks - either your own or club/teams mates are what you sit and reminiss about on long summer days. I haven't tried 21 point games but I can imagine my heart sinking into my boots if I were to be 18-6 down.

I agree, I can see the advantages of the rally point system and I don't really have a problem with it although I do prefer the 'old' system. I do have a problem with the 3x21. I can see that 5x15 is an improvement in that it allows players a better chance to fightback. Let's hope the IBF reconsider the 3x21 format if they decide to keep the rally point system

I'm not sure there is much difference in time.

In a 3x21 game you can win after 42 rallies (ie 2-0). In a 5x15 game you can win in 45 rallies so the time difference isn't so different. 5x15 does allow the person who goes 0-1 down a better chance of a fightback. One of the comments made by players at the recent England v Denmark friendly was that the 3x21 system did not allow chance for the losing player/team to make a comeback.

I think what you say about 3x15 really can't work as that requires the winner to merely win 30 rallies. Those games will be over in no time.

I know it all gets more complicated if there is a fightback and it gets to a 3rd game etc but I can't see that timewise there is much difference. Just my opinion!
Another calculation:

In 3x21: max - [2:1] - 21:19, 19:21 and 21:19 - 120 rallies;
In 5x15: max - [3:2] - 15:13, 13:15, 15:13, 13:15 and 15:13 - 140 rallies [individual];
In 3x15: max - [2:1] - 15:13, 13:15 and 15:13 - 84 rallies [team];

In 3x21: min - [2:0] - 21:0 and 21:0 - 42 rallies;
In 5x15: min - [3:0] - 15:0, 15:0 and 15:0 - 45 rallies [individual];
In 3x15: min - [2:0] - 15:0 and 15:0 - 30 rallies [team];

In 3x21 average 81 rallies;
In 5x15 average 92.5 rallies [individual];
In 3x21 average 57 rallies [team].

In 3x21 average 57 rallies [team].

In 3x15 average 57 rallies [team].:p

The rally point system is a true reflection of the game. You either win or lose a point. There is no second chance and there is less 'monkeying' around. Look at it this way, at least the new system cannot 'rob' you of a point that you have legitimately won from a rally initiated (served) by your opponent.
Also the new system, with its lesser physical toll on players playing at very high levels, will bode well for the future development of Premier League Badminton, run along lines similar to all the Soccer Premier League Tournaments in Europe and South America.

Initially many people dont like the new system and complaining about it... there is definately a reason for everything.

perhaps men double should longer the rallies. the current score point make them so "comfortable" with every match. I don't see them sweating much during the recent China Master. I suggest 3 x 27.

If the IBF uses 5x15 (3x15 for team) rally point system, the timeout should be used as follows:

player/pair A Vs Player/pair B, X for player/pair A's points, Y for player/pair B's points:

if X+Y=10n (n=1, 2 or 3), then timeout starts, eg: 3:7 , 11:9 or 15:15 etc. every timeout should be no more than 30 sceonds.

If a tide comes to 14:14, then the Player/pair who came to 14 points firstly can choose going on or adding 3 more points (the same as traditional format).

Under the rally point system, adding more 3 points, maybe, is not better than not adding anymore. It is an interesting matter for players to choose how to do.

Initially many people dont like the new system and complaining about it... there is definately a reason for everything.

Most people don't like or fear changes, especially if they perceive the changes to adversely affect their current status. They couldn't care less if such changes are good for the community, whether now or in the future.
It reminds me of the time in 1982 when I changed the computing mindset of the corporation I was working in. I was then in charge of computers and computing sciences for the Asia and Pacific region, including a small computing centre in New Jersey, US. I was very dissatisfied with the quality of the computing services provided and at such high costs, especially in the high telecommunications sector and at the tons of management reports that few people read or use. Another problem was that affiliates then started to build computing empires, especially in Australia and in New Jersey. The first thing I did when I was put in charge was to close down the 24-hr computing centre of New Jersey and its link to the HQ. Next thing I did was to close down the Wang-to-Wang Word Processing network (Wang has since disappeared from the cumputer scene) that linked the HQ with its affiliates in 20 other countries. In its place, by then it was 1983, I introduced the tiny Apple pcs to every end users directly. The end users were of course very happy. They could finally get what they wanted because they were doing it themselves. One senior VP used it for his own investment portfolio, which was not what I had in mind. The computing centres became leaner and concentrated on what it did best. Needless to say I had many 'enemies'. After more than 20 years I am proven right. Now almost everyone has a pc. Just ask your fathers or grandfathers if they had ever used a pc in the 1983 in their workplace.

Mr Taneepak.. i think you should run for presidency. :)

Most people don't like or fear changes, especially if they perceive the changes to adversely affect their current status. They couldn't care less if such changes are good for the community, whether now or in the future..



Can this be garranteed?

About 80% of people here dislike the new system now and most probably dislike it in the future..........getting use to it because you have no choice is not 'liking' it.

Watching the Commonwealth games for me was so boring and so stupidly fast I bought tickets to weight lifting and boxing instead.:confused:

Mr Taneepak.. i think you should run for presidency. :)

We've been wrong all this time. You are wrong now. Taneepak is not Punch Gunalan and he does not need to run for president - he is God! He is infallible.

How can the opinions of the Great One be wrong?




Wait a minute...

Most people don't like or fear changes, especially if they perceive the changes to adversely affect their current status. They couldn't care less if such changes are good for the community, whether now or in the future.

He can be wrong after all. Maybe he is not infallible!

The change to rally point scoring won't affect my status as a player or anything else. I am a crap player. So that can't be why I object to the change.

I object to the change precisely because I believe it is bad for the badminton community and the future of the sport.

Oh well.

I object to the change precisely because I believe it is bad for the badminton community and the future of the sport.Oh well.


I agree with you here.

Hey, I have an idea to boost the popularity of Badminton without changing the game.........:)

In between set they could get cheerleaders.....or a group of hot chicks..................and call them the 'Yonex Girls'. to dance around and make our eye go like this---------->:eek: and tounges out like this---->:p

Introduce the players like boxers walking to the ring! With flashing lights and music of their choice.lol

Another calculation:

In 3x21: max - [2:1] - 21:19, 19:21 and 21:19 - 120 rallies;
In 5x15: max - [3:2] - 15:13, 13:15, 15:13, 13:15 and 15:13 - 140 rallies [individual];
In 3x15: max - [2:1] - 15:13, 13:15 and 15:13 - 84 rallies [team];

In 3x21: min - [2:0] - 21:0 and 21:0 - 42 rallies;
In 5x15: min - [3:0] - 15:0, 15:0 and 15:0 - 45 rallies [individual];
In 3x15: min - [2:0] - 15:0 and 15:0 - 30 rallies [team];

In 3x21 average 81 rallies;
In 5x15 average 92.5 rallies [individual];
In 3x21 average 57 rallies [team].

Your last calclation should be "3x15 average 57 rallies" shouldn't it?

Interesting calculations. I would guess that the number of rallies would perhaps be lower than your average at the early stages of a knockout competition and then higher in the later stages (the remaining players being more evenly matched resulting in more rallies).

Just my opinion but I think your idea of 5x15 has definite advantages but I still think the 3x15 would be over far too quickly.

Can this be garranteed?

About 80% of people here dislike the new system now and most probably dislike it in the future..........getting use to it because you have no choice is not 'liking' it.

Watching the Commonwealth games for me was so boring and so stupidly fast I bought tickets to weight lifting and boxing instead.:confused:Can't let a comment like that go unchallenged.:eek:

I dispute the statement "...and most probably dislike it in the future...". Surely that is an overextrapolation.

I think suggestions of 5 games to 15points for rally system are quite valid.

1) the extra rest in between games - good for players, coaches, TV adverts, analysis by commentators (cos the game is pretty fast between points)

2) coming back from 2-0 down to win 2-3 is IMO, much better. It gives players two chances three chances to win a game - 1-0 down, 2-0 down and 2-1 down.

Can't let a comment like that go unchallenged.:eek:

I dispute the statement "...and most probably dislike it in the future...". Surely that is an overextrapolation.

I think suggestions of 5 games to 15points for rally system are quite valid.

1) the extra rest in between games - good for players, coaches, TV adverts, analysis by commentators (cos the game is pretty fast between points)

2) coming back from 2-0 down to win 2-3 is IMO, much better. It gives players two chances three chances to win a game - 1-0 down, 2-0 down and 2-1 down.

MMMMmmmm.......Maybe it is a overextrapolation, maybe not, ask any of the 80% of people here that dislike the new point system if that is a bold statement to make......and you will have your answer.

Yes, 5x15points is a valid statement........but will it make badminton more popular to watch a draw a bigger audience as the change was intended to make?

1) Totally agree this could make Badminton more popular, entertainment between games, more advertisments to fund bigger prize money for players and be used to fund better 'clinics' for schools in countries with little exposer/popularity with the sport.

2) Creating more sets?.........Well I agree, but with the old point system.

Badminton needs a change of image, not a change of rules, to make it more popular. Challenge this statement I dare you.....lol.....:D

Badminton needs a change of image, not a change of rules, to make it more popular. Challenge this statement I dare you.....lol.....:D

u do have a very good point! I agree with u. we need to get the image of "wimpy" sport for lamers to a macho speed and gravity defiying sport

u do have a very good point! I agree with u. we need to get the image of "wimpy" sport for lamers to a macho speed and gravity defiying sport

Ohhh............:eek: This is worth Gold!:)

Badminton has to be marketed.

Sports/fitness magazines with ads that show the full power of Badminton!
Advertisments with pro's in full flight and a blurr of the shuttle from racket face to the floor in one frame!

T.V ads with huge visual impact that shows people what badminton Really is


Very well put Doubles Player!:D

Ohhh............:eek: This is worth Gold!:)

Badminton has to be marketed.

Sports/fitness magazines with ads that show the full power of Badminton!
Advertisments with pro's in full flight and a blurr of the shuttle from racket face to the floor in one frame!

T.V ads with huge visual impact that shows people what badminton Really is


Very well put Doubles Player!:D

It's very difficult to show those things compared to other sports. I mean you won't see a badminton player jump over someone else to dunksmash or something, speed: they only move 3 steps in each direction so it doesn't really look fast except for reaction speed but compared to tabletennis it probably looks slower. Power: to move a shuttlecock that weighs next to nothing looks different from a tennis player hitting the ball. Not to be negative ofcourse but if you can find a unique aspect that's what you should market.

Oh yeah: I agree that best of 3 in rallypoint is too short especially when it's over after 2 games. But when you hear that there were matches that leasted 90 mins at the nationals, 5 sets (21) could be a bit too much as well. Do think 5 sets is the better format for rallypoint though.

MMMMmmmm.......Maybe it is a overextrapolation, maybe not, ask any of the 80% of people here that dislike the new point system if that is a bold statement to make......and you will have your answer.
Yes, we would have an answer, but that is based on perceptions of the future. Ask the same sample of people 1 year later the same question, and the percentages may be very different. If people do not like the 21 point system now, it doesn't necessarily they will follow that opinion later. Look no further than political elections for changes of likes and dislikes.


Yes, 5x15points is a valid statement........but will it make badminton more popular to watch a draw a bigger audience as the change was intended to make?

1) Totally agree this could make Badminton more popular, entertainment between games, more advertisments to fund bigger prize money for players and be used to fund better 'clinics' for schools in countries with little exposer/popularity with the sport.

2) Creating more sets?.........Well I agree, but with the old point system.What do you mean? have a 5 x 15 points but only gain points on serve? We did have 5 games before with 5 x 7 points. My opinion is 5 x 9 points (old points system) would have been better because games were a little too short and changes of ends were too quick. I have been very consistent on favouring 5 x 9 for a few years now. However, I do believe 5 x 15 points (with new scoring system) may also serve the same purpose.

i.e. the main point is to have a best of 5 game match. Matches should not be overtly shortened from the 3 x 15 points (old point system).

It's very difficult to show those things compared to other sports. I mean you won't see a badminton player jump over someone else to dunksmash or something, speed: they only move 3 steps in each direction so it doesn't really look fast except for reaction speed but compared to tabletennis it probably looks slower. Power: to move a shuttlecock that weighs next to nothing looks different from a tennis player hitting the ball. Not to be negative ofcourse but if you can find a unique aspect that's what you should market..



Cever filmwork can work wonders.