Single is being played like Double?

[alfa2]

Has anyone noticed tat the way of playing single nowadays has changed compared to decades ago? Eddy Chong, Foo Kok Keong they all would lob for hours in a match.......but not anymore, like doubles now, more smashing, attacking, drive, less lobbing and lifting (Lin Dan for instance).....even the service had changed from high to low, which is emulated from the double.

mayb in another few decades time, we wont see lobs anymore in the single event. (like in a double match, lobbing is almost none to be seen now). The way and strategy of playing single is evolving..........

[alfa2]

Maybe thats the reason why LCW kept on losing to CHI players? because he played single like single in the past, not like every China players that played single with almost similar strategy to double? maybe we should get rexy to teach single too....:D:D:D:D

BAM can save the extra money for not needing hire a single coach then. Maybe Lin Dan benefits alot from LYB's teaching, and as you can see LYB is a double player who is more familiar with double's strategy.

What do you all think?

[alfa2]

double strategy ----- fast, accurate, attack and prevent the opponent from having the opportunity to make attacking shots.

LCW should stop doing all those fancy tricks to lower the rate of making unforced errors..... e.g. double motion tricks can be hardly seen in double. The most efficient shot is to make it as fast and as accurate as possible. (Lin Dan)

[cheongsa]

That was sort of how the game was played when the scoring format was changed from 3x15 to 5x7.

This sort of game play is much more demanding on the players. It also magnified the technical gap between good players and the very best players.

Most importantly, it made the game very two-dimensional, and consequently very boring to watch.

Professional players, playing practically at the limits of human performance, can choose to play like this only if they are confident they have the stamina to win a match. Some felt they do, but in reality are more or less drained by the end of the second game.

In the current 3x21 rally point system, the games are long enough that none of the professional players can play clearless singles (and win in the end, that is).

[alfa2]

In the current 3x21 rally point system, the games are long enough that none of the professional players can play clearless singles (and win in the end, that is).

comparatively 3X21 rally point system is less exhaustive than the old 3X15 system where a match using the old system can lasts up to 90 minutes. Not to say that it has to be clearless in every match, but to only lift the shuttle when it's neccessary (under pressure), same goes with lobbing.....much much more attacking and less defensive play is what i meant. that's why it is very hard for others to beat Lin Dan....

[cheongsa]

comparatively 3X21 rally point system is less exhaustive than the old 3X15 system where a match using the old system can lasts up to 90 minutes. Not to say that it has to be clearless in every match, but to only lift the shuttle when it's neccessary (under pressure), same goes with lobbing.....much much more attacking and less defensive play is what i meant. that's why it is very hard for others to beat Lin Dan....

Just an observation: if you compare Lin Dan's games from two years ago (3x15, service point) to his games (3x21, rally point) this year, he appears to be smashing less and less (especially his big jump smashes and round the head smashes on his backhand side), and clearing more and more.

[cooler]

Just an observation: if you compare Lin Dan's games from two years ago (3x15, service point) to his games (3x21, rally point) this year, he appears to be smashing less and less (especially his big jump smashes and round the head smashes on his backhand side), and clearing more and more.i think it has less to do with the NSS but rather LD had evolved (ie. better training) into a mature, smarter and more all around player.

[alfa2]

Just an observation: if you compare Lin Dan's games from two years ago (3x15, service point) to his games (3x21, rally point) this year, he appears to be smashing less and less (especially his big jump smashes and round the head smashes on his backhand side), and clearing more and more.
is that so? hmmmm.......mayb u r right, or mayb he's getting old probably.:D:D:D:D:D actually if you really calculate the points of new rally points system which is 21 with service over, averagely it will add up to 11 points/game only (more or less like a women's game points in the past). so it's supposed to be less tiring. which also mean one can spend more energy attacking?

and did u mean overhead smashes when you said "round the head smashes on his backhand side"?

[taneepak]

I don't think singles and doubles are similar, far from it. Time and space in singles have an entirely different dimension from that in doubles. In singles the winning game is based on hitting the shuttle to the 4 extreme corners at varying heights using a variety of strokes, with the attacking clear in combination with your drops for attack, and control of the net to hobble your opponent's ability to return a good length return so that you can deliver the coup-de-grace. In doubles the first three shots are the most important and the objective is primarily one of executing a shot that will 'force' your opponents to lift.
In the earlier years you could find singles players playing doubles for their country. The game of singles and doubles have become so disimilar today that singles and doubles players are do not mix.

[Baderz_Jas]

I agree with teenapak :)

You rarely use the 4 corners in doubles to win a match. Most of the time it's just attacking at the body or driving ;)

[cheongsa]

I agree with teenapak :)

You rarely use the 4 corners in doubles to win a match. Most of the time it's just attacking at the body or driving ;)

You have to divide the four corners by two players in doubles. That works out to two extreme points per player. ALL professional players can handle that comfortably.

Try half-court singles. The rallies never end, if neither side smashes, and almost never ends, when both sides smash, either.

[alfa2]

You have to divide the four corners by two players in doubles. That works out to two extreme points per player. ALL professional players can handle that comfortably.

Try half-court singles. The rallies never end, if neither side smashes, and almost never ends, when both sides smash, either.

hahaa....i think that centre line of the court sometimes makes a good killing spot too, especially when it's really targeted in the middle where both players will rush to get the shot and make mistakes.

[dranmo]

I can't really agree on single are now more like double. If you look at woman single, players who are in the top 5 are play single as it was.
BUT with the new 21 point system, many are trying other possibility on finding a new and best way for the new system. Man single does become more aggressive and now with more young blood joining, you see more smashes and drive since they have the energy to attack more. Especially China Team always believe you need to get to the bird fast and being fast to the bird dominate their game plan, that one of the reason you see more drives and smashes during the game and also you see more and more young faces. also China worries with too many new blood, many experiences player have to retire before they hit peak which generate a lot of young players without stable mantel game mind and lack of experiences on handle different type game.

Anyway different age group has a different style of game play, you can't really say single are more like double but i do believe game plan will start to change in the next few years after we study more on the new 21 point system.

[alfa2]

I can't really agree on single are now more like double. If you look at woman single, players who are in the top 5 are play single as it was.
BUT with the new 21 point system, many are trying other possibility on finding a new and best way for the new system. Man single does become more aggressive and now with more young blood joining, you see more smashes and drive since they have the energy to attack more. Especially China Team always believe you need to get to the bird fast and being fast to the bird dominate their game plan, that one of the reason you see more drives and smashes during the game and also you see more and more young faces. also China worries with too many new blood, many experiences player have to retire before they hit peak which generate a lot of young players without stable mantel game mind and lack of experiences on handle different type game.

Anyway different age group has a different style of game play, you can't really say single are more like double but i do believe game plan will start to change in the next few years after we study more on the new 21 point system.
great synthesis dranmo

what i meant when i say "singles are being played more like doubles" is more or less what you have explained here: more attacking and aggressive play......

"singles are being played more like doubles" is not what i meant literally....

[kidosetiawan]

Maybe thats the reason why LCW kept on losing to CHI players? because he played single like single in the past, not like every China players that played single with almost similar strategy to double? maybe we should get rexy to teach single too....:D:D:D:D

BAM can save the extra money for not needing hire a single coach then. Maybe Lin Dan benefits alot from LYB's teaching, and as you can see LYB is a double player who is more familiar with double's strategy.

What do you all think?

Man dats a very good point....so I thinkChristian Hadinata should go coach the singles too....or maybe Rexy can come back to Indonesia n coach us...btw if u see Lin Dan's game there are 2 ppl sitting in there...one is Li yong bo n I dunno who is the other one I think is singles coach

[alfa2]

maybe KKK should go play single then......:D:D:D

[taneepak]

The game of badminton is not static. It would be better if we allow a "hundred flowers bloom, a thousand thoughts contend" (from Mao Tse Tung) so that different countries and/or different schools or coaching find different ways of adapting to the new game. How else can you progress if all players follow just one system or method?
Remember the game of soccer? In my time we had 5 forwards consisting of center forward, inside right, inside left, and two wingers, 3 centres consisting of centre half, right and left halfs, two full backs (yes we called them full backs), and a goalkeeper. Then the flying Dutchmen changed all that in the 1970s with their "total football". Today it is again different. To-morrow will also be different from today. That is adaptation or evolution.
The same applies to badminton.

[sabathiel]

I can relate to the statement that in badminton singles the game is being played more like doubles to an extent. Players serve small these days more often than high because they don't want to give their opponents the advantage to attack just like in doubles. We see more attacking clears rather than defensive clears. We also often see battle of drives and shots aimed at the body of the players unlike the long rallies from the old days. The singles game is also played at a faster and higher tempo similar to doubles. Having said that there are still differences between singles and doubles already mentioned by others here. The correct thing to say is that singles is played MORE like doubles rather than say singles is played like doubles.

[taneepak]

In the old days of Thomas Cup matches most of the top singles players also double up in doubles for their country. Even the great singles player Hartono played doubles for Indonesia. Today, singles players don't get to play doubles anymore. Surely, the widening difference between singles and doubles today must be a factor for this.

[sabathiel]

I don't recall Rudy Hartono playing doubles in tournaments but I suppose he could have played doubles in team events such as the Thomas Cup against inferior teams. I can't see Rudy playing doubles in Thomas Cup against the top teams such as Malaysia or Denmark. I know that Liem Swie King played doubles at an elite level and won major titles with Christian Hadinata and Bobby Ertanto. If I am not mistaken Liem Swie King also sometimes played doubles and singles in Thomas Cup even against the top teams. To date as far as I know Liem Swie King is the only single player that I know who is also successful in singles and doubles at the elite level.

In my opinion the reason why players no longer play singles and doubles anymore is not because there is a widening difference between singles and doubles today but rather to the more competitive nature of badminton today compared to the old days. Badminton today is more demanding in terms of fitness, speed and power which leads to a higher degree of specialisation. In the old days it is not until the semifinals or finals that badminton is played at a competitive level. In the earlier rounds players like Rudy Hartono wins comfortably in straight sets under 5 points. These days more people from different countries play badminton and it is not uncommon for a top seed to lose in the earlier rounds (eg Lin Dan in the 2004 Olympics losing to Ronald Susilo from Singapore). The matches in earlier rounds are also more competitive. In light of this more demanding task it is foolish for a singles player to also compete in doubles.

In the old days doubles specialist like Christian Hadinata manage to play singles and doubles and do well. Christian made it to the All England finals in 1973 where he lost to Rudy in the finals relatively easy (under 5 in both sets if I am not mistaken).

Peter Gade was the World Junior doubles champion and became a singles specialist and has done very well. Recently we see Xie Xuan Ze an ex singles player playing mixed doubles but he only plays doubles when he no longer plays singles. It's not that singles players can't play doubles these days as a good singles players would be able to play doubles at a reasonable level but rather the more demanding nature and more competitive nature of badminton makes it extremely strenuous to play singles and doubles.

Why do you think singles players mostly serve small these days? A lot of them also serves small with a backhand serve usually most common in doubles. The basic strateggy in doubles is to keep the shuttle down to prevent your opponent from attacking (smashing). This has become the common singles strategy today. The players of old basic singles strategy (especially Euroepean players) is to rally and out manouvre their opponents by moving them to the four corners of the court. A smash is only employed as a coup de grace to end the rally at the right time. Although Rudy is one of the pioneers of an agressive style of play Rudy is only employs a smash at this very right time to end the rally and is better known as a master tactician rather than a truly agressive/attacking player like Liem Swie King. Smashing to the body in the old days is unheard of and you could hardly witness a battle of drives between players. Players serve long to the baseline because they know that this is the beginning of long rallies commonly seen in those days. Serving small is rarely seen in singles in those days and serving small with a backhand serve (ala doubles serve) is unheard of. Even the European players who traditionally is the rallying type plays an attacking style of badminton commonly seen in doubles in the old days. Peter Gade even serves small with a backhand serve when even the European doubles player of the old days serves with a forehand.

All these changes in singles are mainly influenced by not giving your opponent the chance to attack by hitting the shuttle down and not lifting the shuttle high which is the traditional tactic of playing doubles. Obviously there are still differences between doubles and singles but it is incorrect to say that there is a widening difference between singles and doubles today (this conclusion is not backed up with premises or explanations as to how one can come to this conclusion in terms of how doubles and singles are played today). If anything there is a narrowing difference between men's singles and men's doubles today as I already explained.

[taneepak]

Some of the players who played both singles and doubles for their country many years ago:
-Denmark : J Skaarup, Skaarup, F Kobbero, E Kops, S Pri, Frost Hansen, etc.
-Malaysia : Ooi Teik Hock, Ong Poh Lim, Eddy Choong, Yew Cheng Hoe, Tan Aik Huang, Punch Gunalan, J Selvaraj, etc.
-Indonesia : Tan Joe Hock, FA Sonneville, R Hartono, Liem Swie King
-USA : Mitchell, R Williams

Today : Please fill in .................................................. ..

[sabathiel]

I have given an explanation as to why players today don't play singles and doubles anymore. I also explained that there is a narrowing difference between how singles is played and how doubles is played. However, I have not come across to any explanations of the conclusion that there is a widening difference between singles and doubles. So if anyone would like to back up the conclusion with explanations or arguments as to how there is widening difference between singles and doubles I would appreciate that. To say that singles and doubles is different is one thing but to say there is a widening difference between singles and doubles is stretching the truth too far and in my opinion indefensible.

[taneepak]

The widening difference between singles and doubles is due to increased specialization on the different basic fundamentals of the two games.
Singles basic tactics are to run your opponent about as much as possible by playing to the four corners, using clears (both attacking and very high defensive type) and drops (mainly to the two front corners). On seeing a less than good return from your opponent you can then go in for the kill.
It will be silly to do this singles tactic of clears to the back and drops to the two front corners in doubles. Even the drop in doubles avoids the front sides like poison and opts for the centre instead.
The absence of top singles players playing top level doubles today is because singles players today will be very poor doubles players at the highest level. The same applies to doubles players trying to play singles. This is a fact, as shown in statistics. Of course you can try to rationalize the reasons for this, either one way or another way, but they are at best a lot of words that are subjective. Hard statistics are more objective, because they have no "colour".
The basic tactic is different. There is more undefended space in singles. Singles players have much better footwork and backhand, the latter very necessary for that big unguarded space. An attacking clear in singles is an attacking shot to move the opponent around. An attacking clear in doubles is plain silly.

[ctjcad]

..and chime in on this(if you guys don't mind me jumping in)..:)
Well, personally, the *only* "difference" i've seen in the current generation of competitions, esp. in singles play, to the old generation of competitions is the prevalent use of the.....short serve...
More short serves than one of those long deep serves, esp. in MS...Although in WS, nowadays, it's arguable that they still employ the long, deep serve..;)
As to why it's more prevalent in MS than in WS??...who knows..:confused::rolleyes:

[oliviergmar]

..and chime in on this(if you guys don't mind me jumping in)..:)
Well, personally, the *only* "difference" i've seen in the current generation of competitions, esp. in singles play, to the old generation of competitions is the prevalent use of the.....short serve...
More short serves than one of those long deep serves, esp. in MS...Although in WS, nowadays, it's arguable that they still employ the long, deep serve..;)
As to why it's more prevalent in MS than in WS??...who knows..:confused::rolleyes:

I personaly use the short serve agaisnt people who smash real hard near the lines but I will still use long serves against people with a poor-average smash.

I think the whole idea of the short serv is because pros can smash near the line so there's no reason to make a long serve and lose the rally right away.

For average badminton players, I think a mix of short, long and flick serves is a good way to go.

[ctjcad]

"Well, personally, the *only* "difference" i've seen in the current generation of PROFESSIONAL IBF/BWF competitions, esp. in singles play, to the old generation of PROFESSIONAL IBF/BWF competitions is the prevalent use of the.....short serve...";)

[taneepak]

Despite the apparent similarity of the low backhand serve you find in singles and doubles, they are actually different. To play it the same way for both games can be suicidal. Just watch more videos to find out.

[sabathiel]

The widening difference between singles and doubles is due to increased specialization on the different basic fundamentals of the two games.
Singles basic tactics are to run your opponent about as much as possible by playing to the four corners, using clears (both attacking and very high defensive type) and drops (mainly to the two front corners). On seeing a less than good return from your opponent you can then go in for the kill.
It will be silly to do this singles tactic of clears to the back and drops to the two front corners in doubles. Even the drop in doubles avoids the front sides like poison and opts for the centre instead.
The absence of top singles players playing top level doubles today is because singles players today will be very poor doubles players at the highest level. The same applies to doubles players trying to play singles. This is a fact, as shown in statistics. Of course you can try to rationalize the reasons for this, either one way or another way, but they are at best a lot of words that are subjective. Hard statistics are more objective, because they have no "colour".
The basic tactic is different. There is more undefended space in singles. Singles players have much better footwork and backhand, the latter very necessary for that big unguarded space. An attacking clear in singles is an attacking shot to move the opponent around. An attacking clear in doubles is plain silly.

You have highlighted the difference between singles and doubles by analysing the respective games but you have not provided any support for your conclusion of a WIDENING difference between singles and doubles today. In order to prove there is a widening difference one would have to provide an analysis of how singles and doubles are played in the past and an analysis of how singles and doubles are played today. From that comparison analysis of past and present one then can conclude that there is a WIDENING difference in singles and doubles today by showing there is a difference in playing singles and doubles in the past and today and that that difference is widening not narrowing (which is my case and I have shown the required analysis of the games in the past and today).

It is a common tactic in doubles in the past and today to move your smashing opponent from the two back corners of the court by lifting the shuttle (retrieved from a smash) into the backhand corner if the smasher was smashing from the forehand corner and vice versa. Hence it can be said that the two back corners of the court is also used as in singles. A drop shot to the centre of the court is often used however it is not unusual to drop to the front 2 corners of the court to avoid monotony especially if the corner is unguarded or to catch your opponent by surprise. Hence all 4 corners plus the middle court as well as the opponents body are legitimate targets. It is true in singles nobody dropshots to the centre but the body of the opponent is nowadays a legitimate target unlike in the past.

Clears from the back of one's court to the back of one's opponent court in men's doubles is rarely seen (but common in women's doubles) or even unheard of at the top level. Having said that at lower levels (ie non world level) the attacking clear is sometimes used in men's doubles to catch the opponent by surprise (as they would be expecting a drop or smash). I play A grade badminton in Australia and sometimes employ the attacking clear with some good effect as well as some of my opponents. This is because at our level if caught by surprise the only thing a player can do is to clear back and sometimes the result is a half court clear which can be smashed more easily. At world level the male players are way too fast to anticipate this shot that is why you don't see it played in men's doubles. An attacking clear is employed to force your opponent off guard in the hope he can't return the shuttle or if he manages to return the shot his return is weak so it can be smashed. This is the main aim of an attacking clear not to simply move your opponent around because a defensive clear can be used to move your opponent around also.

You mention statistics but I didn't see any statistics you provide. So the argument based on statistics doesn't help your case at all. if what you mean by statistics is the fact that no singles players play doubles and no doubles players play singles this fact alone doesn't lead to a conclusion that there is a widening difference between singles and doubles. It simply shows that singles players don't play doubles and doubles players don't play singles. My case is that the reason of this is because the more competitive and more demanding nature of badminton today compared to the old days which leads to specialisation. The players simply do not have the stamina to excell in singles and doubles at the same time. The abundance of pool of singles and doubles players at world level also mean it is not required for those players to play both singles and doubles. Having said that at a lower level I know that Tony Gunawan plays singles for the USA for the lack of high quality singles players and Tony is good enough to beat those lower level opponents in singles. At a national and state level in Australia it is very common for male players to play singles, men's doubles and mix doubles in team events and to a lesser extent in tournaments.

An attacking singles player like Liem Swie King is very good in men's doubles for the reason that he can be the more effective doubles partner playing the back court where he can leash his smashes. Paired with a partner who is good at the net such as his partner Christian Hadinata this can make a lethal combination. Even lesser attacking singles players like Icuk Sugiarto and Morten Frost Hansen can play effective men's doubles by playing the back court because a singles player can reasonably attack well from the back. So pairing these singles players with a doubles specialist who covers the net well is a good idea. Singles players of today who are even more accustomed to playing attacking games (often with sharp drives) will have no problem with playing men's doubles by specialising as the attacking player playing at the back. It is common in doubles to arrange the attacking player to play at the back and if he happens t be at the net during an attacking formation (front and back in contrast to side by side) the net player at the back would only have to smash cross court and let the attacking player at the net anticipate the high straight return to the back by moving backwards. The result is a reverse of position, now the attacking player at the net will be at the back and the net player at the back will be at the net.

You are correct in saying that singles players are better in footwork than doubles players (I don't know about the better at backhand bit). This is why singles players will have no problem in playing doubles but the reverese is not true. Doubles players will have problems in playing singles if he has no good footwork. Good footwork in singles is not a handicap in doubles where there is less use of footwork.

You have shown (with errors) how singles is different from doubles. With respect this is not the argument, the argument is whether there is a WIDENING difference in the way singles and doubles are played today compared to the way they are played in the past. My case is that there is a NARROWING difference not a WIDENING difference and I have elaborated this by analysing the difference of how the games are played in the past and how they are played today plus how a singles player can with reasonable comfort play doubles with examples. I wait for the required comparative analysis of past and present singles and doubles.

[sabathiel]

Despite the apparent similarity of the low backhand serve you find in singles and doubles, they are actually different. To play it the same way for both games can be suicidal. Just watch more videos to find out.

Care to point out the differences from your point of view? I also spot minor differences but I am more interested in your perspective because you brought it up without illustrating how they are different. With respect again noone is saying doubles and singles are played exactly the same but rather there is a narrowing difference no matter how small that narrowing difference is. Surely, a shift from serving high and long in singles to serving short and low points in the direction of a narrowing of difference in how singles and doubles are played. This is the case despite the obvious differences.

[taneepak]

For starters, lifting a short singles serve to the back is ok. Would you do this in doubles? You could get away with this in doubles in the old days by lifting to the backhand corner, but not today.
Lifting to the two corners when returning smashes in doubles is all sound and fury but it doesn't change the fact that you have not changed the staus quo-you are still defending and your opponents are still attacking. The single major objective in doubles is to play every shot, every stroke, to force your opponents to lift. It is from these high shots that you and your partner have 'engineered' with all your cunning, teamwork, guile and skills to force your opponents to 'gift' you, that you are on a winning run. In singles, a high lift to the back when returning a low serve is not a 'gift'.
The two low serves look similar but they are different underneath.
There are also other differences. Perhaps you can volunteer.

[sabathiel]

I just watched the finals of the Asian Games 2006 MSF between Taufik and Lin Dan and observed the principles of doubles mainly used in the match. It is rare where you find a player who clears to his opponent getting another clear back as a matter of fact I can't remember two consecutive clears used in the match. Everytime a player is forced to defensively lift from the net (due to the tightness of the net shot) or to clear from the back the opponent capitalises on this by either smashing or doing a drop shot like in doubles. The player attacking will not give away this advantage of attacking the shuttle by doing a clear. In the old days a battle of clears in singles is dominates the rally and is often seen but not these days at least not in the match I observed (Asian Games 06 MSF).

Most of the serves are low and short and many if not most of the return serves are net shots. If a player receives a small serve and wants to play the back court of his opponent he will most likely push it to his opponent's backhand or if it is to his forehand (rarely seen) it would be deep into the back forehand court to avoid an easy smash. A defensive lob from the net after a short serve is not seen unlike in the past due the reason that this would be seen as an invitation to the opponent to attack. Once a player is in an attacking mode (in a position of hitting the shuttle down) the best thing his opponent can do is to drive the smash or to return the shuttle to the net thus challenging the other player to a battle at the net. Taufik's superior net play and backhand at the back gave him the advantage over Lin Dan.

Although no doubt the game still has a singles principle (using the four corners of the court) this principle is less used compared to the old days and the doubles principle of not lifting to the back (hence keeping the advantage of being in an attackng position) unless one is forced to do so or the player does a deep push to the backhand side or deep forehand of his opponent. From this one can also conclude that a defensive lob from the net to the forehand in return of a small serve which enables the opponent to smash and hence be in an attacking mode can also be seen as a "gift". Prolonged rallies from the back court of the old days no longer exist particularly under the new scoring sytsem where the game is faster and come backs from behind are difficult to achieve. Thus players of today will not risked being on the backfoot of defending and will keep attacking as the chances of winning the rally is higher if one is attacking rather than defending. Maybe you have the match I just observed which I would say is today's typical strategy in men's singles.

I must say that long rallies from the back court is still often used in women's singles as the women's speed and strength are nowhere near the men's speed and strength.

In regard to the low/short backhand (or even forehand serve) the difference that I note is in the position of the server. In doubles the server serves right behind the T line at the front obviously because he has a partner to cover the back court. In singles today the server stands further away from the front T line of the court obviously since he has to cover more ground at the back court.

Hence the specific case of the Asian Games 06 MSF provides the proof that at least in that match there is a narrowing difference, not a widening difference, between singles and doubles today. I am sure other recent matches also supports the same conclusion.

[taneepak]

I just watched the finals of the Asian Games 2006 MSF between Taufik and Lin Dan and observed the principles of doubles mainly used in the match.

Hence the specific case of the Asian Games 06 MSF provides the proof that at least in that match there is a narrowing difference, not a widening difference, between singles and doubles today. I am sure other recent matches also supports the same conclusion.

If what you say is true, then it is a matter of time before Lin Dan/Bao CL and Taufik/Sony become formidable doubles combinations, a natural evolution to your "narrowing of differences". Forty years ago I would say yes, they would be as good as being made in heaven. Today, well today is a very different day, and never will the twine meet. From being neighbours forty years ago they are both now at opposite poles, which is closer to "widening" than "narrowing".

[sabathiel]

Try watching the match that I observed to see whether you agree or disagree with my match analysis.

But just because Taufik and Sony or Bao Chun Lai and Lin Dan aren't playing doubles don't necessarily mean they are not formidable doubles players. It is simply means that they don't want to play doubles not that they can't play doubles today. In any event combining two singles players together is unheard of at world level in any era to my knowledge. At least one of the player in the pair must be a doubles specialist. Why would the singles players of today play doubles when they are facing tough competitions in singles. You would have to be a superman to play both doubles and singles today. The chances of suffering an injury is very high. How often do we see players with ankle supporters or various other supporters in the old days. These days many players try to prevent injuries by using these injury prevetion measures. It goes to show of the very demading nature of playing badminton at world level today. Off course if these singles players want to retire from singles and concentrate on a doubles career this would be a different story such as in the case of Xie Xuan Ze.

Only countries that lack players field players in singles and doubles such as Mia Audina for the Nederlands and Tony Gunawan for the USA. I can't see why great doubles players like Tony Gunawan cannot perform well if paired with Taufik or Sony for the reasons I have already mentioned. Mind you earlier in their careers (junior level) all players play singles and doubles. Doubles players play doubles because they are not good enough to play singles but a singles player is good enough to play doubles. Remember when the great women singles player Li Ling Wei teams up with I think it was Han Ai Ping (another great women's singles player) and beats all the top doubles players in the 80s?

Another point to consider is that just because two players are great individually, either in doubles or singles, it doesn't mean that they will make a good doubl pair. They might not gel well together like Tjun Tjun who won All England 6 times with Johan Wahyudi in the 70s but doesn't play well with anyone else. Even if they gel well together they have to train together to familiarise themselves with each other's game. Without training no matter how well they play with each other they will lag behind the other pairs who train together as well as gel well together. So 2 great singles players won't necessarily make a good doubles pair even today where the singles game in my opinion is played more like doubles because they adopt the basic principle of doubles play. Can you imagine a singles player training in doubles and singles in national training camp. As I said only superman can do this in today's high demanding badminton.

[alfa2]

..and chime in on this(if you guys don't mind me jumping in)..:)
Well, personally, the *only* "difference" i've seen in the current generation of competitions, esp. in singles play, to the old generation of competitions is the prevalent use of the.....short serve...
More short serves than one of those long deep serves, esp. in MS...Although in WS, nowadays, it's arguable that they still employ the long, deep serve..;)
As to why it's more prevalent in MS than in WS??...who knows..:confused::rolleyes:
It is that way because in WS, women players dont have that much of power, speed and energy to keep up a fully efficient attacking game like what LD can offer. Thats why in WS, they sometimes still prefer long serves.

Just finished watching the AE final between Morten Frost and ZhaoJianHua, I wonder why this game cant provide me that kind of excitement i had before (used to be my favourite when i was small) when watching it mayb because after the exposure of the more agressive play of today's MS style.

And I couldnt agree more with Sabathiel, it's almost like my words coming out from his mouth, :D:D:D:D:D:D BUT of course in a more refined and well defined manner. Thats why a professional is professional.......:p:p:p:p

I have corrections to be made though, it should be "Singles is played MORE like Doubles" instead of "Singles in played like Doubles".

[alfa2]

"Well, personally, the *only* "difference" i've seen in the current generation of PROFESSIONAL IBF/BWF competitions, esp. in singles play, to the old generation of PROFESSIONAL IBF/BWF competitions is the prevalent use of the.....short serve...";)

ctjcad, do you still have the olden days' video? maybe you can watch it then compare it with how MS is played nowadays. and for the statistics, comparing the former world champion Han Jian, Yangyang and ZhaoJianHua to Lin Dan.

Statistics are taken on the average of every 5 points out of 30 points game.

Smashes = LinDan 3.23X more than other players

Offensive net lifting= LinDan 4.71X more than other players
Long high net lifting = LD 2.18X less than other players

Offensive lob = LinDan 6.74X more
High lob = LD 2.67X less

I hope this provide a clearer image for you ctjcad.

[alfa2]

im really drained out already after comparing all these chinese world champion (6 hrs of video watching, 11 pages of A4 paper, my pause/play button almost fell off already, have to pause/play few times for every points:crying::crying::crying::crying:). anyone mind doing the statistics for European players?? Morten Frost, Poul Erik Hoyer Larsen and Peter Gade? then the stats would be complete.

[sabathiel]

Hi alfa2! It's nice to see that you agree with my analysis and you corrected the topic by adding the word "more".

You must have a lot of video collections of the old players and curren t players. If you follow the history of badminton you would find that the game, especially the men's singles, has become faster, more powerful and more aggressive as time goes on. Gone are the days of the baseline rallies of old preferred by European players. Defensive players such as Icuk Sugiarto and Han Jian are extinct today. Even as late as the 90s the long rally players such as Ardy Wiranata does well at the world stage.

[eggroll]

I think the new scoring system has resulted in a flatter more driving style of singles because of the loss of a point if you try to work the corners too much and hit the shuttle out. I also think that a good doubles player can be an effective singles player now because of this change in strategy. At the club level I don't think it is as much a factor but at the world level it is becoming more so. I don't have stats but the game has changed in this past year. If you get up 5 or 6 points now you can exchange serves for a while and be up 16-12 and then it's tough to come back. A score like 21-15 is pretty much a lopsided win and when it gets to be 17-16 or 18-17 it's gut check time! Personally I don't like it much. Takes the strategy out of working a guy around the court then putting him away because you lose points to an attacking style then can't get it back as easy when it was a 15 point game.

[eggroll]

[ Even as late as the 90s the long rally players such as Ardy Wiranata does well at the world stage.[/QUOTE]

Funny you mention Ardy. He lives here in my part of the world and I speak with him often. He thinks he would have a very tough time of it with the new style and scoring because the game is over too quick now and would not suit his work the opponent around until he can't chase the shhuttle down anymore tactic. He also helped me fromulate my comments in my previous thread.

[ctjcad]

It is that way because in WS, women players dont have that much of power, speed and energy to keep up a fully efficient attacking game like what LD can offer. Thats why in WS, they sometimes still prefer long serves.
..alfa2, actually i understand that difference, but i was actually looking for someone to expound more on this; so i'm glad you were able to take it up..good job & good for ya!;):D:cool:

ctjcad, do you still have the olden days' video? maybe you can watch it then compare it with how MS is played nowadays. and for the statistics, comparing the former world champion Han Jian, Yangyang and ZhaoJianHua to Lin Dan.

Statistics are taken on the average of every 5 points out of 30 points game.

Smashes = LinDan 3.23X more than other players

Offensive net lifting= LinDan 4.71X more than other players
Long high net lifting = LD 2.18X less than other players

Offensive lob = LinDan 6.74X more
High lob = LD 2.67X less

I hope this provide a clearer image for you ctjcad.
..hmm, to answer your question of whether i have videos of the olden days, my answer is no, i don't have those videos of the olden players. But again, as we already know, and as you and taneepak & sabathiel already elaborated, the olden (MS)players do have a different playing style than the (MS)players of today. Thus, back to my original p.o.v.(point of view) that the only difference i, personally, can see, esp. in MS, is the more prevalent use of the short backhand serve in..;):)
Abt those statistical numbers, thanks for providing for all of us.;)

Btw, good discussions guys, but i hope we can get other members' inputs. I wonder where are the other "BCF resident coaches" in here to give us their inputs(ie. Gollum, KiwiPlayer etc.);) :):cool:

[sabathiel]

[ Even as late as the 90s the long rally players such as Ardy Wiranata does well at the world stage.

Funny you mention Ardy. He lives here in my part of the world and I speak with him often. He thinks he would have a very tough time of it with the new style and scoring because the game is over too quick now and would not suit his work the opponent around until he can't chase the shhuttle down anymore tactic. He also helped me fromulate my comments in my previous thread.[/quote]

You know Ardy personally? I use to train at the same badminton hall with him when I was living (and holidayed) in Jakarta. We often see each other but we don't know each other personally. My best friend in junior high school use to be Ardy's nemesis in his junior days (under 15 West Jakarta championships).

[alfa2]

I think the new scoring system has resulted in a flatter more driving style of singles because of the loss of a point if you try to work the corners too much and hit the shuttle out. I also think that a good doubles player can be an effective singles player now because of this change in strategy. At the club level I don't think it is as much a factor but at the world level it is becoming more so. I don't have stats but the game has changed in this past year. If you get up 5 or 6 points now you can exchange serves for a while and be up 16-12 and then it's tough to come back. A score like 21-15 is pretty much a lopsided win and when it gets to be 17-16 or 18-17 it's gut check time! Personally I don't like it much. Takes the strategy out of working a guy around the court then putting him away because you lose points to an attacking style then can't get it back as easy when it was a 15 point game.

yes, i deeply agree that the new style of playing singles partly has something to do with the new scoring system. A player could concentrate his strength in producing a more agressive play in the new scoring system because the 21 points is averagely around 10-11 points only if it was calculated in the 15 points system. That's why the match time is also reduced to almost half.

[eggroll]

You know Ardy personally? I use to train at the same badminton hall with him when I was living (and holidayed) in Jakarta. We often see each other but we don't know each other personally. My best friend in junior high school use to be Ardy's nemesis in his junior days (under 15 West Jakarta championships).[/QUOTE]


Yes I talk to Ardy frequently. He is a coach at the Glencoe club here in Calgary. I stop by there once a week as part of my job and he is a pleasure to speak to and work with. I also am friends with Channarong Rattannasangsueng.(sp?) He was a former world champion and is now retired from his role as head professional at the Glencoe. Chan, as he was called, is one of the most genuine and nicest men I have ever met. His example has shaped many lives and he effected myself by his example. Of note Chan doesn't like the new scoring much either as it may be good for television but the loss of the stategy is being dropped in favour of power and attacking. Chan felt that was what doubles was for.

[eggroll]

yes, i deeply agree that the new style of playing singles partly has something to do with the new scoring system. A player could concentrate his strength in producing a more agressive play in the new scoring system because the 21 points is averagely around 10-11 points only if it was calculated in the 15 points system. That's why the match time is also reduced to almost half.

You're spot on here. I have watched a number of old matches and scored them with the new system and the games would be over in approximately half the time and they lose an aspect of the drama created in the game to 15.

[wedgewenis]

Agreed.......................................

[sabathiel]

You know Ardy personally? I use to train at the same badminton hall with him when I was living (and holidayed) in Jakarta. We often see each other but we don't know each other personally. My best friend in junior high school use to be Ardy's nemesis in his junior days (under 15 West Jakarta championships).


Yes I talk to Ardy frequently. He is a coach at the Glencoe club here in Calgary. I stop by there once a week as part of my job and he is a pleasure to speak to and work with. I also am friends with Channarong Rattannasangsueng.(sp?) He was a former world champion and is now retired from his role as head professional at the Glencoe. Chan, as he was called, is one of the most genuine and nicest men I have ever met. His example has shaped many lives and he effected myself by his example. Of note Chan doesn't like the new scoring much either as it may be good for television but the loss of the stategy is being dropped in favour of power and attacking. Chan felt that was what doubles was for.[/quote]

Isn't Ardy also the coach of the Canadian national team?

I have never heard of this Channarong Rattannasangseung. Where is he from? I am sure if he was a former world champion I would have heard of him. What world champion was he of?

[alfa2]

never heard of chan also (i think mayb from thailand). mayb a world champion for a very short period (like LCW) b4 the time we were borned......

[sabathiel]

I doubt he was a world champion at any time because before we were born Thailand was nowhere in world badminton. Maybe he was a junior doubles world champion?

Lee Chong Wei was never a World Champion unless what you meant was that he was ranked no 1 for a short period.

[taneepak]

Channarong Ratanasaengsuang was one of the first batch of Thai badminton players that the late great Wong Peng Soon, invited by the King of Thailand, helped Thailand to build up. Prior to this period badminton was never heard of in Thailand. Channarong was a pretty good player, having whitewashed the top English players and even the famous Danish Finn Kobbero in the All England in the early 1960s, only to lose to Earland Kops in the final. He and Earland Kops toured Canada in the 1960s, with the former deciding to stay. But in the early 1960/61 Thomas Cup Finals, he was beaten by Indonesia's Tan Joe Hock and FA Sonneville.
There were no World Championships at that time.

[alfa2]

so one has to win World Championship to be called world champion? To me, AE is as prestigious as World Championship.....

[modious]

http://www.badmintonasia.org/newspage.aspx?newsID=65

Don't think many of us will know who he is as he was playing in the 60s.

And you can find more abt Channarong in Oon Chong Teik badminton memories. http://www.viweb.freehosting.net/OonCT.htm

[eggroll]

Channarong Ratanasaengsuang was one of the first batch of Thai badminton players that the late great Wong Peng Soon, invited by the King of Thailand, helped Thailand to build up. Prior to this period badminton was never heard of in Thailand. Channarong was a pretty good player, having whitewashed the top English players and even the famous Danish Finn Kobbero in the All England in the early 1960s, only to lose to Earland Kops in the final. He and Earland Kops toured Canada in the 1960s, with the former deciding to stay. But in the early 1960/61 Thomas Cup Finals, he was beaten by Indonesia's Tan Joe Hock and FA Sonneville.
There were no World Championships at that time.


VERY GOOD History lesson there. Yes, you are right that Chan stayed behind and became the coach at the Glencoe. I'm sorry if I was off on the World Champion designation. Everybody around the Glencoe referred to him being champion but you are quite correct in that there was no WC at that time.

[eggroll]

Yes I talk to Ardy frequently. He is a coach at the Glencoe club here in Calgary. I stop by there once a week as part of my job and he is a pleasure to speak to and work with. I also am friends with Channarong Rattannasangsueng.(sp?) He was a former world champion and is now retired from his role as head professional at the Glencoe. Chan, as he was called, is one of the most genuine and nicest men I have ever met. His example has shaped many lives and he effected myself by his example. Of note Chan doesn't like the new scoring much either as it may be good for television but the loss of the stategy is being dropped in favour of power and attacking. Chan felt that was what doubles was for.

Isn't Ardy also the coach of the Canadian national team?

I have never heard of this Channarong Rattannasangseung. Where is he from? I am sure if he was a former world champion I would have heard of him. What world champion was he of?[/QUOTE]


Yes Ardy is one of the coaches of the National Centre at the Glencoe Club. In effect he is a National Team coach but the system here has the players scattered around the country in clubs so there is no home base for them.

[alfa2]

Isn't Ardy also the coach of the Canadian national team?

I have never heard of this Channarong Rattannasangseung. Where is he from? I am sure if he was a former world champion I would have heard of him. What world champion was he of?

Yes Ardy is one of the coaches of the National Centre at the Glencoe Club. In effect he is a National Team coach but the system here has the players scattered around the country in clubs so there is no home base for them.[/quote]

hmmm......Ardy Wiranata, one of my favourites when i was small. still remember his cute little face, and especially when he had long hair, he looked abit like hamster.....hehehe:D:D:D:D:D:D Another hero of mine was Hariyanto Arbi, and i have always felt that he was one of the sifu of today's attacking game in MS (before he got injured in his knee).....

[eggroll]

Hey Sabathiel! I saw Ardy this morning and I mentioned your reference to his nemesis at 15 years old and he wondered who that was and if he might know your name as well. Pm me so I can relay to Ardy who you and your friend are! We chatted about the conversation here on the forum and he reiterated his dislikes, and mine, about the new version of singles.

Ardy was getting ready to coach a bunch of juniors in a tournament at my club and as usual he was smiling and looking forward to another great day of badminton!

[cooler]

Hey Sabathiel! I saw Ardy this morning and I mentioned your reference to his nemesis at 15 years old and he wondered who that was and if he might know your name as well. Pm me so I can relay to Ardy who you and your friend are! We chatted about the conversation here on the forum and he reiterated his dislikes, and mine, about the new version of singles.

Ardy was getting ready to coach a bunch of juniors in a tournament at my club and as usual he was smiling and looking forward to another great day of badminton!
and you call that work?:D

[Kelvin]

and you call that work?:D
lol:p

I <3 Chan he was one of my favorite teachers when i was a young lass.
I hope if i get to his age, I'll be as upstanding as he :)
I should pop by to say hello if he still frequents Glencoe.

[alfa2]

lol:p

I <3 Chan he was one of my favorite teachers when i was a young lass.
I hope if i get to his age, I'll be as upstanding as he :)
I should pop by to say hello if he still frequents Glencoe.

how old is Chan by the way?

[Kelvin]

how old is Chan by the way?
i think he should be early 60's by now.
mind you, i know quite a few players that are 70-80ish and still going strong lol

[alfa-2]

can LCW become a better player if he is to play like KKK/TBH by having more agressive attacking play, flat drives? Instead of giving his opponents more chance to attack him. Attack is the best defence.

[alfa-2]

The way i see why LCW has lost his rhythm lately is not due to his pressure but others have improved alot in their attacking play. His secret formula has already been cracked by others esp the Chinese.

LCW has to change his play of amazing saves and counter attack.....into more aggressive attacking play, he needs powerful smashes like LD n TH.

[alfa-2]

just watch some badminton clip on youtube. search for "crazy badminton" at www.youtube.com.

that's the reason why badminton is the most tiring racquet sport in this world and all the professional players are underpaid. amazing.....

[JaCk™]

The way i see why LCW has lost his rhythm lately is not due to his pressure but others have improved alot in their attacking play. His secret formula has already been cracked by others esp the Chinese.

LCW has to change his play of amazing saves and counter attack.....into more aggressive attacking play, he needs powerful smashes like LD n TH.
i agree with you. LCW does not start to attack first but prefer to wait for his opponent to attack first. then LCW will start diving all over his court and the spactators will clap. LCW must stop his defensive and counter attack style. He need to attack first and must improve his smash too. Lin Dan is improving everyday..

[alfa-2]

if LCW can improve on that particular area.....i believe he can be back on the league with the top ones soon.....

[JaCk™]

as we can see, many top players are aggressive players, not stroke or defensive player. LCW must improve on his attacking play. if not, he will lag behind

[alfa-2]

will Simon and Sony be playing at ABC???

[JaCk™]

will Simon and Sony be playing at ABC???

i think they will cos i remember Choon Hann saying he is waiting for revenge in ABC.

[alfa-2]

kkakakaakaka.....im so happy that WCH has the spirit of a champion. Proud of him.

[JaCk™]

WCH is very determined and hardworking. How is Kuan Beng Hong doing during training? Why no TITLES from him? Aiyo.. How much money has he earned from BAM till he win a SS?

[alfa-2]

KBH ah....aiyo i wana pening again already........

[JaCk™]

KBH will not play in ABC. Wong Tat Meng confirmed the decision due to KBH poor performance.

[alfa-2]

good. coz i dun wan to see him play when i go there........unless he can beat someone big as a compensation to us, loyal supporters who have been failed by KBH everytime we support him.

[volcom]

The way i see why LCW has lost his rhythm lately is not due to his pressure but others have improved alot in their attacking play. His secret formula has already been cracked by others esp the Chinese.

LCW has to change his play of amazing saves and counter attack.....into more aggressive attacking play, he needs powerful smashes like LD n TH.

Taufik smashes are not that powerful, his backhand smashes are sometimes better. I'd say Chen Hongs smashes were quite awesome.
Bao Chunlai though plays like a girl and his smashes dont seem very powerful either, but he manages to win lots of quarter finals and semis.

[alfa-2]

are you sure that TH smashes are not powerful? in TV it is quite impressive.....

[OneToughBirdie]

Taufik smashes are not that powerful, his backhand smashes are sometimes better. I'd say Chen Hongs smashes were quite awesome.
Bao Chunlai though plays like a girl and his smashes dont seem very powerful either, but he manages to win lots of quarter finals and semis.
Not sure if you see TH live or on video. His smashes at WC05 (I flew to see and saw all 7 days in the stadium) was powerful and produce winners. LD's smashes are killers too, as seen live. CH smashes are good too.
On BCL, I must caution you, watch out for Sickgal if you criticize BCL too much...just ask Cooler, Sickgal hates him...oh lordy!!! LOL!!!:p

[winnie]

yaya sickgal support chinese 1..hahaha

[alfa-2]

isit? she likes BCL??? why not KBH instead??? he's cute too.....and adorable!!! hahhaa.....

[winnie]

i dunno specific.. but beside kkk/tbh she like chn players too..
well, i do hv fav players from other countries too

[volcom]

Not sure if you see TH live or on video. His smashes at WC05 (I flew to see and saw all 7 days in the stadium) was powerful and produce winners. LD's smashes are killers too, as seen live. CH smashes are good too.
On BCL, I must caution you, watch out for Sickgal if you criticize BCL too much...just ask Cooler, Sickgal hates him...oh lordy!!! LOL!!!:p

No Imean his smashes were powerful back then, but watched him in AG, he seemed to lack the killer smashes now, relying more on other aspects of the game.

[OneToughBirdie]

No Imean his smashes were powerful back then, but watched him in AG, he seemed to lack the killer smashes now, relying more on other aspects of the game.
You may be right.

[alfa-2]

but he stil won it anyway......love the way how he handled his opponents.

[JaCk™]

if you don't have stamina, don't smash too much.

[alfa-2]

TH will play at ABC? why nowadays they seldom measure the speed of smashes already?

[winnie]

well, mind telling me how the speed of the smashes are measured?

[JaCk™]

well, mind telling me how the speed of the smashes are measured?
same as how u measure car speed.. i think so.. never measure my smash speed wor..

[winnie]

huh?? how? use what?

[alfa-2]

your smashes too fast already....travelling at the speed of Mach5....:D:D:D:D:D

[angelatby]

huh?? how? use what?

I think same as the Maths tat we used to learn. Distance devide by Time

Distance/Time = Average Speed :)

[volcom]

Using a radar... speed gun

[angelatby]

Using a radar... speed gun

Sort of... yeah ..erm laser speed gun, normally use to measure the speed for the car and light reflection, tornadoes, hurricanes and many more, also related to radio-waves. Going more to physics, Omg, should stop here.

[alfa-2]

then lets go into chemistry......:D:D:D:D

[winnie]

wah.. u guys are so professional la..
esp angela! haha u still remember the formula?? hahaha i think i have returned all of them to my teacher!

[alfa-2]

haha....since when this thread become a physic class already? hehehe...........

[JaCk™]

So easy.. Same as how the police catch you for speeding.. Same logic applies on how the police can measure your speed..

[alfa-2]

ok......will there be a summon case for underspeeding of smashes??? for instance under 150kph?

[winnie]

wakakaka..hey come on.. out of topic again?? heheh..beware later kwun come n lock this thread leh..

[alfa-2]

let's stop here about the out of topics posts shall we? let us concentrate on the thread "single is played more like double"...........:p:p:p

[alfa-2]

can a MD coach coaches MS? how about letting Rexy (after all MAS MD are on the right track) to take charge of LCW if Misbun fails to improve LCW's play? is that possible? His mental strength needs some boosts now where i think Rexy can help a lot in that particular field.


Imagine Rexy is shouting "berani Chong Wei" when he is playing against TH in ABC.

[winnie]

but then can rexy take care of so many players? what wtm will think then?

[angelatby]

can a MD coach coaches MS? how about letting Rexy (after all MAS MD are on the right track) to take charge of LCW if Misbun fails to improve LCW's play? is that possible? His mental strength needs some boosts now where i think Rexy can help a lot in that particular field.


Imagine Rexy is shouting "berani Chong Wei" when he is playing against TH in ABC.

Mine is vice versa, instead of thinking for MD coach to train MS, i would think of whether is there any possiblity for MD player to play as MS player?? I remember WCH was in MD before he shifted to MS, correct me if im wrong. :p :p :p

[winnie]

MD play as MS? good idea.. i think we have many good MD players..maybe not all of them got chance to play in main tournament but then is there chances for them to play for MS? kkk shift to be in MD also because there's not much chances for him to show his talents in MS

[sabathiel]

Peter Gade was World Junior champion in MD.

[JaCk™]

no way a player can be excellent in singles and doubles. if you really play badminton, you cannot adapt to these two events immediately. the playing style is totally diferent. once you are a good double player, you need take a few years to be a good single player. no such thing as immediate success.

[sabathiel]

no way a player can be excellent in singles and doubles. if you really play badminton, you cannot adapt to these two events immediately. the playing style is totally diferent. once you are a good double player, you need take a few years to be a good single player. no such thing as immediate success.

Are you talking now or ever? Players who are successful in doubles, XD and singles:

Li Lingwei (singles specialist in the 80s)
Han Ai Ping (singles specialist in the 80s)
Christian Hadinata (doubles specialist in the 70s and 80s)
Liem Swie King (singles specialist in the 70s and 80s)
Lene Koppen (singles specialist in the 70s and 80s)
Gillian Gilks (all rounder in the 60s, 70s and 80s)
Verawaty (singles specialist in the 70s and 80s)
Ivana Lie (singles specialist in the 70s and 80s)

Those players have excelled in singles and doubles (some in mixed doubles as well) and have won major titles in both events with the exception of Christian whom to my knowledge only managed a singles runner up at All England.

Liem Swie King won 3 AE singles titles, 1 Indonesian Open singles title and 2 Indonesian Open doubles title with 2 different partners. He also excelled in doubles in Thomas Cup partnering with Christian Hadinata which makes at least partnering with 3 different partners in world badminton and done very well.

Li Ling Wei won 2 singles All England title and 1 AE doubles title partnering with Han Ai Ping (80s) who also won 1 AE singles title. Both of them together also won 1 Indonesian Open doubles title. Li Lingwei also won 3 singles Indonesian Open title.

Lene Koppen won AE singles title twice, World Championship singles once and World Championships in XD once.

Gillian Gilks won AE singles title once, AE doubles twice and AE XD title 6 times with multiple partners. She also won silver at the World Championships in singles and XD.

Verawaty won various major singles (eg World Championship and Indonesian Open), doubles (with Ivana Lie who also won singles titles and XD title with Christian Hadinata at the Indonesian Open) and XD title.

So your theory that no way a player can be excellent in singles and doubles cannot be backed up by historical facts which shows the opposite.

[alfa-2]

lots of players that failed to achieve good results in MS were tuned into becoming a MD players. Rexy is a good example. Main reason why most player are interested in MS are:

1) Possibility to be a richer man is higher (price money)
2) Easier to excel in MS if one is an excellent player. MD takes 2 excellent players to induce a World Champion like Rexy/Ricky. And not just that, communication and symbiosis of the partnership are one of the main factors that will determine the success or failure of that partnership.

[alfa-2]

like CSK n SBK who are both talented MD players but they failed in the partnership because the arising of communication problem......SBK kena bash too KUAT n too OFTEN.....hahaha......

[winnie]

yup..there's need for communication and understanding of ur partners in order for u to cover up his weakness and he cover up urs

[JaCk™]

Are you talking now or ever?
So your theory that no way a player can be excellent in singles and doubles cannot be backed up by historical facts which shows the opposite.

badminton had undergone revolution. today, the speed is faster and require physical strength and stamina. no way a player can play well in two events. we cannot compare liem swee king with taufik hidayat today. doubles requires speed. fu hai feng has powerful smash but his smash will kill himself in singles. his recovery is slow. lin dan has powerful smash but he can't be as good as koo kien kiet in doubles. badminton has changed and now, professional players must choose between singles and doubles in order to be the best in their event. however, exceptions are allow in mix double, men's double and women's double. no way playing in both singles and doubles event.

[sabathiel]

badminton had undergone revolution. today, the speed is faster and require physical strength and stamina. no way a player can play well in two events. we cannot compare liem swee king with taufik hidayat today. doubles requires speed. fu hai feng has powerful smash but his smash will kill himself in singles. his recovery is slow. lin dan has powerful smash but he can't be as good as koo kien kiet in doubles. badminton has changed and now, professional players must choose between singles and doubles in order to be the best in their event. however, exceptions are allow in mix double, men's double and women's double. no way playing in both singles and doubles event.

I agree with you to be successful today a player must specialise in either singles or doubles because the game has been more demanding. However players like Mia Audina played singles and doubles and did reasonably well. The revolution in badminton that you talked about came a long time ago in the era of Rudy Hartono and Liem Swie King who promoted a game of speed and power. The current players like Taufik Hidayat etc never tried playing doubles so we don't know how they would go but I know Tony Gunawan played singles and doubles representing the US in Thomas Cup qualification and won his games against B grade opponents in the North American region.

[JaCk™]

in short, a world number 1 singles player cannot be the world number 1 doubles player at the same time. a world singles champion cannot be a world doubles champion at the same time. this is a fact TODAY and CURRENTLY. the past is different.

[alfa-2]

not possibly to be both champion at the same time because it takes the fitness of an alien to do it......even tongkat ali essence drink cant help him to recover his between the matches......

[sabathiel]

in short, a world number 1 singles player cannot be the world number 1 doubles player at the same time. a world singles champion cannot be a world doubles champion at the same time. this is a fact TODAY and CURRENTLY. the past is different.

"Cannot" or "is not". How do you know they cannot when nobody has tried yet today?

How is the past different?

[angelatby]

"Cannot" or "is not". How do you know they cannot when nobody has tried yet today?

How is the past different?


Past and Now, meaning to say the 21 Points n 15 Points difference. Players cannot afford to make so much mistake as for now. Yep, is true Peter Gade (and many other players as mentioned) once excel in both as Single & Double Player. But ask again two Questions :

(1) How long did they played as a Double Player, &
(2) Why did they choose to specialise as a Single Player. (or Double Player)

Only certain players can take the pressure n burden to be both Single & Double Player, which is foreseen by the coach. Otherwise, why wouldnt a Coach train Single as well as Double Player. And Why the Single & Double Games is being seen as a different games all along, past, now & future. Who says Single is harder to play, both Single & Double is tough and challenging in their own ways. I always believe NO one man show. I think The question here is not only Can or Cannot, but is Will or Will Not.

[angelatby]

And talk about Prize Money, Players chose to be a Single Player instead of Double Player because of Prize Money more rewarding, im sorry to say but this is abit ridiculous right as a professional atlete. By putting a risk to just win the Money knowing that they themselves are better to be a Double Player is outrage, LOL! I think Player tried to play as a Single as well as Double to find out what suits them best, rather than to excel in both Single & Double. And this implied only on potential players (NOT ALL PLAYERS)

[sabathiel]

Past and Now, meaning to say the 21 Points n 15 Points difference. Players cannot afford to make so much mistake as for now. Yep, is true Peter Gade (and many other players as mentioned) once excel in both as Single & Double Player. But ask again two Questions :

(1) How long did they played as a Double Player, &
(2) Why did they choose to specialise as a Single Player. (or Double Player)

Only certain players can take the pressure n burden to be both Single & Double Player, which is foreseen by the coach. Otherwise, why wouldnt a Coach train Single as well as Double Player. And Why the Single & Double Games is being seen as a different games all along, past, now & future. Who says Single is harder to play, both Single & Double is tough and challenging in their own ways. I always believe NO one man show. I think The question here is not only Can or Cannot, but is Will or Will Not.

But I think the New Scoring System is less demanding than the Old Scoring System. Under the NSS the match finishes earlier than the OSS. So in terms of stamina you need not be as fit as under the OSS. Under the OSS a match can last as long as 2 hours but under the NSS 1 hour is considered very long. It is true a player can not afford to make as many mistakes under the NSS because a mistake automatically means a point to your opponent while under the OSS it can mean simply change of service.

I think a player always start from being a singles player in the junior days and later specialises in either singles or doubles at least this was the case when I grew up in Indonesia 20 years ago. In Australia at State and National level a player has to play singles, doubles and mixed doubles. This is the case in the past as well as today. It is only when the national players play in international tournaments that they begin to specialise in either singles or doubles.

Singles is harder to play because you need to be super fit with great footwork unlike doubles which doesn't need super fitness or excellent footwork to cover all the court by yourself. It has been said that doubles player play doubles because they are not good enough to play singles. So doubles players are second grade singles players according to this theory.

[JaCk™]

to put it simple, players can play singles and doubles at RECREATIONAL LEVEL AND ALSO DOMESTIC LEVEL.
but it is IMPOSSIBLE TO BE THE WORLD NO.1 FOR BOTH SINGLES AND DOUBLES event in INTERNATIONAL LEVEL.
playing in singles and doubles AND becoming the best in singles and doubles are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
get this clear first and we shall stick to the topic.

[sabathiel]

to put it simple, players can play singles and doubles at RECREATIONAL LEVEL AND ALSO DOMESTIC LEVEL.
but it is IMPOSSIBLE TO BE THE WORLD NO.1 FOR BOTH SINGLES AND DOUBLES event in INTERNATIONAL LEVEL.
playing in singles and doubles AND becoming the best in singles and doubles are TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.
get this clear first and we shall stick to the topic.

You are just guessing (though you maybe right) because nobody today has tried playing singles and doubles internationally and fail and thus proof your theory!

[angelatby]

But I think the New Scoring System is less demanding than the Old Scoring System. Under the NSS the match finishes earlier than the OSS. So in terms of stamina you need not be as fit as under the OSS. Under the OSS a match can last as long as 2 hours but under the NSS 1 hour is considered very long. It is true a player can not afford to make as many mistakes under the NSS because a mistake automatically means a point to your opponent while under the OSS it can mean simply change of service.

I think a player always start from being a singles player in the junior days and later specialises in either singles or doubles at least this was the case when I grew up in Indonesia 20 years ago. In Australia at State and National level a player has to play singles, doubles and mixed doubles. This is the case in the past as well as today. It is only when the national players play in international tournaments that they begin to specialise in either singles or doubles.

Singles is harder to play because you need to be super fit with great footwork unlike doubles which doesn't need super fitness or excellent footwork to cover all the court by yourself. It has been said that doubles player play doubles because they are not good enough to play singles. So doubles players are second grade singles players according to this theory.


Legend : S – Single(s) D – Double(s)

Well, it is quite similar to Malaysia where a fresh junior player usually starts to play as a S player before venture into D. However, a weak S player doesnt necessary means a total transform to become a D player. I agree with you that a S Player needs to be total fit in all aspects. However, i do not quite agree that D players play D because they are not good enough as a S. Well, if is in this case, does it means all S can play D game. I dont think so and it doesnt work this way either. D game come 2nd after S game is because of the Prize Money for S, a mutual understanding of an individual in S game, of that coach alone, with that player alone to fill with the same enthusiasm if the best results are to be achieved and also because of the winning that belong to that person ALONE. D game is more to a mutual understanding of two persons, same thoughts and same inspiration and objectives to be a team. Dont be surprise that D players not just training among 2 vs 2 but that 2 players practise among each other - 1 vs 1. This couldnt be done in S game. I would say D players' understanding of S game is stronger than a S player in D. S cannot practise like a D, but D can. My point is, it might be true D uses lesser strength, lesser power to resist attack, maybe not so stress or strain BUT this doesnt means it is EASIER to play therefore second grade after S game.

[winnie]

You are just guessing (though you maybe right) because nobody today has tried playing singles and doubles internationally and fail and thus proof your theory!
then what about u try playing it yourself?? u think the players are robot meh?

[sabathiel]

then what about u try playing it yourself?? u think the players are robot meh?

Everybody here plays singles, doubles and mixed doubles at State and National level.

[winnie]

Everybody here plays singles, doubles and mixed doubles at State and National level.
so u should prove to us that ones can be excel in both singles and doubles at the same time! proves ur theory and show us it is possible cos as u said no 1 ever tried so maybe u wana be the 1st to do it?

[cheongsa]

What has this thread degenerating into?

The singles and doubles games have been evolving independently all along. They are tactically very different, involves a different core set of strokes, and also different situation awareness.

However, there have been cross fertilization between the disciplines, partly due to players crossing over, and bringing a different perspective along. Peter Gade was a European junior MD champion, and Wong Choon Hann started out as MD player.

Kim Dong Moon and Ra Kyung Min, MD, WD, and XD specialists, both started out as singles players, even though South Korea has a strong tradition in the doubles disciplines (unlike China, whose MD squad gets only discards from the MS squad). More recently, Xia Xuanze, MS World Champion, enjoyed a fair bit of success in XD because of singles shots that he injects into the game.

Professional players from the badminton powers tend to concentrate on one discipline, because the competition within the national squads is so intense. In other countries, it is common to have professional players playing all disciplines they are qualified to play. For example, in the Singapore National Championships, Ronald Susilo plays MS, MD, and XD. Kendrick Lee sometimes play all three disciplines as well. US national players also play three disciplines (e.g. Eva Lee playing WS, WD, and XD), when the draws are favorable (i.e. entry into the qualifying or main draws).

Of course, being practically untouchable in the MAL MS squad, Lee Chong Wei might decide he wants to play XD as well. But the MAL XD squad is rather large, so he might not actually make it into the squad. More importantly, Lee Chong Wei has no XD ranking points to speak of, so he won't even be able to get into the qualifying rounds of any big tournaments. Hence, we do not see Lee Chong Wei playing XD.

[Eurasian =--(O)]

taufik and gade both almost played doubles instead of singles.

[OneToughBirdie]

so u should prove to us that ones can be excel in both singles and doubles at the same time! proves ur theory and show us it is possible cos as u said no 1 ever tried so maybe u wana be the 1st to do it?

Hey Winnie...I advise not to bet against Sabathiel, cos he could excel in both WS and WD and, what the heck! even XD. Do you know why?...because Australia is not a badminton country, there is no bloody good players down under, there with no competition and the folks there probably can't tell a birdie from a real bird, so you can play any or ALL positions and win them all...Hahahaha! Unlike CHN, MAS, KOR, DEN and INA, heck you cannot even make the reserve team, maybe if you apply for the job to pick up used birdies you might have a better chance...hahaha!!! LOL!!!
Sabathiel, I do not mean to make fun of you...just to have a little humor and a good laugh. :D :D :D :p :p :p

[winnie]

Hey Winnie...I advise not to bet against Sabathiel, cos he could excel in both WS and WD and, what the heck! even XD. Do you know why?...because Australia is not a badminton country, there is no bloody good players down under, there with no competition and the folks there probably can't tell a birdie from a real bird, so you can play any or ALL positions and win them all...Hahahaha! Unlike CHN, MAS, KOR, DEN and INA, heck you cannot even make the reserve team, maybe if you apply for the job to pick up used birdies you might have a better chance...hahaha!!! LOL!!!
Sabathiel, I do not mean to make fun of you...just to have a little humor and a good laugh. :D :D :D :p :p :p

haha so is a he or she??
okok better dun bet
but he/she is saying excel in both singles n doubles mah..means got gd ranking in both! so how? thats why i ask he/she proof lo..hehe:D

[OneToughBirdie]

haha so is a he or she??
okok better dun bet
but he/she is saying excel in both singles n doubles mah..means got gd ranking in both! so how? thats why i ask he/she proof lo..hehe:D
Thanks for picking on my error...I mean MS and MD...I was rushing out to play badminton with my buddy, Cooler and my friends...:D

[sabathiel]

so u should prove to us that ones can be excel in both singles and doubles at the same time! proves ur theory and show us it is possible cos as u said no 1 ever tried so maybe u wana be the 1st to do it?

I don't have to proof anything because I didn't come up with a theory. Jack came up with a theory that it is impossible to excell in singles and doubles internationally so I told him nobody has tried and therefore prove his theory is correct. It is the one who comes up with the theory who has to prove it is correct. I didn't say you can excell in singles and doubles internationally so I didn't have to prove anything to anyone. I simply doubted Jack although I admit that it is possible he could be right but unless it has been tried then we don't really know for sure.:D

[sabathiel]

Peter Gade was a European junior MD champion, and Wong Choon Hann started out as MD player.

Kim Dong Moon and Ra Kyung Min, MD, WD, and XD specialists, both started out as singles players, even though South Korea has a strong tradition in the doubles disciplines (unlike China, whose MD squad gets only discards from the MS squad). More recently, Xia Xuanze, MS World Champion, enjoyed a fair bit of success in XD because of singles shots that he injects into the game.

Professional players from the badminton powers tend to concentrate on one discipline, because the competition within the national squads is so intense. In other countries, it is common to have professional players playing all disciplines they are qualified to play. For example, in the Singapore National Championships, Ronald Susilo plays MS, MD, and XD. Kendrick Lee sometimes play all three disciplines as well. US national players also play three disciplines (e.g. Eva Lee playing WS, WD, and XD), when the draws are favorable (i.e. entry into the qualifying or main draws).



Peter Gade according to his website was the World Junior MD champion.

On the topic of US national players, this year (2007) Howard Bach won the MS, MD and XD in the US National Championships.

[sabathiel]

Hey Winnie...I advise not to bet against Sabathiel, cos he could excel in both WS and WD and, what the heck! even XD. Do you know why?...because Australia is not a badminton country, there is no bloody good players down under, there with no competition and the folks there probably can't tell a birdie from a real bird, so you can play any or ALL positions and win them all...Hahahaha! Unlike CHN, MAS, KOR, DEN and INA, heck you cannot even make the reserve team, maybe if you apply for the job to pick up used birdies you might have a better chance...hahaha!!! LOL!!!
Sabathiel, I do not mean to make fun of you...just to have a little humor and a good laugh. :D :D :D :p :p :p

You are right Australia is a badminton dwarf in world badminton but on the current form we are doing better than Canada judging from performances at world level and last year's Commonwealth Games. Even with ex All England champion, Ardy Wiranata, coaching Canada still is not doing better than Australia.:D

[winnie]

hey sabathiel, so u play badminton?? try play both n tell us the feelings..hehe
i think it's reli hard to excel in both areas la..hmm jz my opinion.. hope some 1 can try it..so sabathiel, i hope u can try it, k? hehe ;)

[alfa-2]

ill try my next life......

[winnie]

ill try my next life......
wakaka:D y next life?? now u r too old edy, is it?? never too late to try mah..;)

[alfa-2]

hahah....coz i know i cant be world champion for both MS n MD.........or should u try? ehhehe..........

[alfa-2]

ask LD to try then......partnering him up with CJ. nice.....

[alfa-2]

how about a friendly match between canada n australia? who wil win.....line the players up.

[winnie]

ask LD to try then......partnering him up with CJ. nice.....
hahaha LD with CJ ar for MD?? then is it CY/FHF position will be in danger?

[winnie]

hahah....coz i know i cant be world champion for both MS n MD.........or should u try? ehhehe..........
i try?? u gotta be kidding me..haha i havent touch my racquet since 10 yrs ago..kakaka..maybe u can ask angela..she's been practicing lately..hehe:D

[alfa-2]

then WMC's position will be threatened soon...........

[OneToughBirdie]

how about a friendly match between canada n australia? who wil win.....line the players up.
Canada WS is represented by Juliene Denise who is >40 years old and still Canada's best WS player, possibly can play until old gae and collect pension. The men side is forever represented by the Milroy brothers, perenial first round casualty, and the way it goes can also play until old age too.....therefore if we line them up against AUS players,....err.....what should we be playing for...a six bottle of lemonade and a dozen birdies??? Also, who is paying for the airline tickets and are we paying for the fans to watch or should the fans pay to watch the game at all (I doubt anyone wanna sponsor this game or any fans would pay, cos the game is as exciting as watching paint dry)...see that is not easy to fix a friendly game when both nations are in opposite hemisphere...hahaha!!! LOL!:p

[sabathiel]

hey sabathiel, so u play badminton?? try play both n tell us the feelings..hehe
i think it's reli hard to excel in both areas la..hmm jz my opinion.. hope some 1 can try it..so sabathiel, i hope u can try it, k? hehe ;)
I play MS, MD and XD in competition here and it is not uncommonto win at least 2 titles. As a matter of fact the best players excell in all three at State and National level. Not only we play all three events the tournaments are held over a period of 2 days (on weekends) and we play 1st round to semifinal in 1 day for all three events. Only on Sunday we play the Finals for all events. So imagine how exhausting you become.

I told you already, Howard Bach (who won the 2005 World Championships with Tony Gunawan in MD) won the MS, MD and XD at the 2007 US Nationals. So excelling at all three events can be done although not currently (it has been done in the past) done at world level.

[sabathiel]

Canada WS is represented by Juliene Denise who is >40 years old and still Canada's best WS player, possibly can play until old gae and collect pension. The men side is forever represented by the Milroy brothers, perenial first round casualty, and the way it goes can also play until old age too.....therefore if we line them up against AUS players,....err.....what should we be playing for...a six bottle of lemonade and a dozen birdies??? Also, who is paying for the airline tickets and are we paying for the fans to watch or should the fans pay to watch the game at all (I doubt anyone wanna sponsor this game or any fans would pay, cos the game is as exciting as watching paint dry)...see that is not easy to fix a friendly game when both nations are in opposite hemisphere...hahaha!!! LOL!:p

To my knowledge the 40+ years Denyse Julien only play doubles these days. Australia has a Taiwanese female singles player playing who have made it to the quarter finals of the Super Series or Grand Prix events. We also have an Indonesian player who plays doubles with an Australian born player who is ranked in the Top 30 of MD in the world. In the 80s we have a top ranked player from Hongkong (later Taiwan) called Sze Yu who played for Australia and was in the Top 5 in the world.

[OneToughBirdie]

To my knowledge the 40+ years Denyse Julien only play doubles these days. Australia has a Taiwanese female singles player playing who have made it to the quarter finals of the Super Series or Grand Prix events. We also have an Indonesian player who plays doubles with an Australian born player who is ranked in the Top 30 of MD in the world. In the 80s we have a top ranked player from Hongkong (later Taiwan) called Sze Yu who played for Australia and was in the Top 5 in the world.
You are quite up todate, I am impressed...Julien (you even spell her name correctly hahaha!) does play WD this days but I think she did win Canadian WS or runner-up....on the light side, at least Canada is represented by her own people, born and raised here...AUS depends on imports, but what the heck, if it works why not? hahaha!!! LOL!!:D

[sabathiel]

You are quite up todate, I am impressed...Julien (you even spell her name correctly hahaha!) does play WD this days but I think she did win Canadian WS or runner-up....on the light side, at least Canada is represented by her own people, born and raised here...AUS depends on imports, but what the heck, if it works why not? hahaha!!! LOL!!:D

I know Denyse Julien from the 80s and 90s because she use to be quiet good in singles and I think she did well at the Commonwealth Games.

Yeah we are hoping that the imports will raise the level of badminton here in terms of skill and popularity.

[Paulet jr]

Ok, i am from Aus, here is my point of view.
firstly for the "can a parson be the best in the world at both". it is extreamly hard, near impossible for a player to be singles, doubles and mixed champion, purerly because is takes different training to become a master of one of them, and for a player to be the best, they must dedicate all their time towards one thing, otherwise they would not be the best at any of the events.
Howard Bach may have taken tripple title at US nationals, but compare him to say Lin Dan, Taufik, LWC, Peter Gade, he is not nearly their standard in singles, nor is he Nova Widiantos standard in mixed, this is because he doesnt train 24/7 for singles or mixed, he is mainly a doubles player, the only reason he did so well in that tournament is because his skills are far above the rest of the US players (except tony gunawan, but i dont think he played in the singles and mixed competition). The only player i know of to have made it far in more than one event (except doubles and mixed) was Ong Beng Teong, as far as i know he was world no.1 in doubles, then quit that, and focused only on singles, where he reached world no.5 or something.
as for a game between aus and canada, i think Chai-chi (noted she is an import) could take anna rice or who ever is canada's ladies singles, canada would win mens singles, it would be very close for mens doubles, Aji sindoro/ashley brehaut, currently i think world 28, would be close with the milroy brothers, or that mike beers guy. as for ladies doubles..well who cares, and mixed, i dont know the canadian pairs, but Aus has 4 pairs that are roughly even, so i dont know who would play, whether it be Erin & ben, ross & tania, Glen and susan, or Aji and peggy(though she isnt national squad), but yeah, if we played each other, it would be a very close tie

[alfa-2]

sorry paulet jr but i seriously dont know half those players you mentioned in your post. hehehe........

[Paulet jr]

yeah, none of the mixed pairs are very high, you have to be from here or new zealand to know who they are :P

[alfa-2]

LCW has changed his game style back to a stroke player lately.........seems working good for him........

[Paulet jr]

i think this would mainly be because hes defence is so good, he is handling the rallies, and can take what ever the opposition is giving him.
and he still has that amazing cross court slice to win the rally when his opponent is slightly out of position.
as long as its working for him though

[sonnymak]

Juat add my two cents worth.
Badminton is an evolving game. In the 70s, you get to see different style of play from different countries. The Malaysians were usually like stroke playing , Danes all round touch play at the net or back. The Indonesians are more varied, you have stroke play with attack or attack with stroke play.
The Chinese were attack attack and more attack (actually came from the Indonesians as Tang Hsien Hu, How Jia Chang and Fang Kai xiang were Indonesians train by Indonesian BA before thay were forced to migtare to China in the 60s).

One of the 1st to adopt so-called double style in singles was Punch Gunalan who was All England champion with Ng Boon Bee in doubles and when he played singles he just play net waiting for the high lobs and then smash.

However in the late 80s and early 90s, you see convergence in the sylte of play of the singles. Players from different countries began to adopt styles from other countries so musch so that that singles players are not very different from each other in style technique and strategies. Varaitions are still there but quite hard to find.

As for LCW's stroke play and over head slice, those are trade marks of his coach Misbun Sidek. Misbun, especially in the early 80s used a lot of delayed overhead strokes and chop smash from the right court to the left court. Only difference is that LCW does it faster and in mid air as well as lots of smash thrown in, Misbun rarely smash.

In the early 80s Misbun used to beat Prakash Padukone, Icuk , Morten, Luan Jin and Han Jian although he never won anything major the others fear playing against him. Come mid 80s, Misbun's play were plagued by inconnsistencies and he werent taken seriously after that.

[alfa-2]

LCW has changed his game style due to his knee injury which surprisingly won him the 1st FO, reversing the chronology evolution of how single is being played. Misbun must be very proud of him. Maybe some other country can import Misbun after 2008??

[Paulet jr]

haha, he can come to australia!!!

[alfa-2]

haha, he can come to australia!!!

but does the roti canai and teh tarik taste as good as those in Malaysia?? Misbun gonna miss those........:D:D:D

[winnie]

haha, he can come to australia!!!
there, he wont hv good sparring partner! so he cant improve further

[alfa-2]

there, he wont hv good sparring partner! so he cant improve further

we are talking about Misbun, not LCW..........:D:D:D

[Paulet jr]

yup, and i was being pretty sarcastic, why would such a coach come to a country where badminton is such a minorit sport

[alfa-2]

yup, and i was being pretty sarcastic, why would such a coach come to a country where badminton is such a minorit sport

to promote roti canai, teh tarik and badminton............:D:D:D

[koo_fan]

yup, and i was being pretty sarcastic, why would such a coach come to a country where badminton is such a minorit sport
a little bit off topic

describe the meaning of Badminton for australian.

[koo_fan]

to promote roti canai, teh tarik and badminton............:D:D:D
yeah right..haha
acceptable..

[winnie]

we are talking about Misbun, not LCW..........:D:D:D
wahaha.. opss.. cos i was thinking, if misbun go to aussie, lcw might follow! hehe loyalty to his coach ma:p:D:D but i dun hope so la.. hahaha:D:D