.
Greetings,

Much have been said about CHN not interested in participating in the SSF tournament.

I see 2 main points here:
(1) The reason CHN gave for not participating in the SSF is because they said the SSF clashed with their team training session.
(2) The reason BWF gave for limiting the number of entries from each nation in the SSF is because they wanted as many countries as possible to participate in it.

I would like our BCers to answer 2 questions here:
(a) Should the SSF be moved to different time of the year so that CHN can participate in it?
(b) Should the SSF be limited to 1 player per event per country so that we can have 8 countries participating in each event?

In (a), I can see that CHN is following the seasonal year, while BWF is following the calendar year. But, Badminton is lucky because we play it indoor. So tournaments and/or training sessions could be rescheduled to different times of the year.

In (b), I would like to see that the SSF be organised for the No.1's from each country competing against each other. To enhance international rivalry, organising the No.1's from countries playing against each other is definitely better. And it should get many nationalistic fans more enthused. However, in terms of skill demonstration, watching the No.1 and No.2 from CHN might be better. They are currently the strongest nation in Badminton.

What are your thoughts/answers to questions (a) and (b)?

:):):)
.

Limit to 1 player/country???

Are you encouraging badminton to be even more based on a country instead of an individual??? That's not promoting the sport whatsoever... you are encouraging players to be even more heavily depending on their national badminton organization... Trust me, history is telling you that this will only keep badminton at the current level with a pity prize awards at every single tournament.


This super series final idea is just so lame... might as well just watch the C.Masters in Denmark, since it is pretty much the same format with a few more players only.:rolleyes:


Plus... why create another thread with the same idea as the China withdrew from SSF thread??? Are you suffering from "A.D.D"???

Limit to 1 player/country???

Are you encouraging badminton to be even more based on a country instead of an individual??? That's not promoting the sport whatsoever... you are encouraging players to be even more heavily depending on their national badminton organization... Trust me, history is telling you that this will only keep badminton at the current level with a pity prize awards at every single tournament.


This super series final idea is just so lame... might as well just watch the C.Masters in Denmark, since it is pretty much the same format with a few more players only.:rolleyes:


Plus... why create another thread with the same idea as the China withdrew from SSF thread??? Are you suffering from "A.D.D"???

I have to admit, I'm no where near as excited about the SS Finals as I "should be". Part of that is probably China's absence (They can't attend a 4 day tournament because of training??). But it just doesn't seem to have been organised well at all. Getting cancelled last year was just a disaster... and that alone did a lot to kill my enthusiasm. And Andrew Smith? I think even SS tournament qualifiers can beat him...

That said, I'm still looking forward to it... about as much as most other tournaments, but nothing like I would the WC, Thomas/Uber/Sudirman, AE or Olympics.

.
I thought my suggestion of having the No.1 player from each of the top 8 countries to play was a great idea.

Let us compare the two.

Mens Singles (No.1 from country):
1. Lee Chong Wei (MAS)
2. Lin Dan (CHN)
3. Sony Dwi Kuncoro (INA)
4. Peter Gade (DEN)
5. Lee Hyun ll (KOR)
6. Przemyslaw Wacha (POL)
7. Boonsak Ponsana (THA)
8. Chetan Anand (IDN)

Mens Singles (2008 SSF):
1. Lee Chong Wei (MAS)
2. Peter Gade (DEN)
3. Wong Choong Hann (MAS)
4. Chan Yan Kit (HKG)
5. Sony Dwi Kuncoro (INA)
6. Joachim Persson (DEN)
7. Taufik Hidayat (INA)
8. Andrew Smith (ENG)
.

.
And after the withdrawal of CHN, the players will be:

Mens Singles (No.1 from country):
1. Lee Chong Wei (MAS)
2. Sony Dwi Kuncoro (INA)
3. Peter Gade (DEN)
4. Lee Hyun ll (KOR)
5. Przemyslaw Wacha (POL)
6. Boonsak Ponsana (THA)
7. Chetan Anand (IDN)
8. Nguyen Tien Minh (VIE)
.

To be fair, if the Super Series Final is for the best of the best in every event then there should be no quota per country. If quota have to be implemented then let it be 4 max per event so Team China will not feel being the victims. I really don't mind watch Chinese vs Chinese as long as the coaches don't decide the outcome for them which is unlikely for the Super Series as there is no ranking point.
We can argue the whole day but it will not change the outcome so lets this saga rest in peace and lets enjoy what we have on going ... Go SS Final!

I think China has really taught BWF a lesson this time... :p "Wanna limit us to just 2 players/pairs per category eh? Then we don't go to the tournament at all!!!" :p

sorry for being devil's advocate. but we have to go back and wonder:

what is the point of the SSF anyway? we already have a yearly world championship. having another SSF seems a bit pointless.

furthermore, although it is announced beforehand, did BWF consult each of the potential country whether they can attend? it doesn't sound like they have.

China did come out to be a bit arrogant for not attending, but there is also no regulation saying that they have to attend. perhaps in the future, BWF should mandate the attendance of the SSF.

and if you look at the broader picture. the whole thing also shows how poor the relationship is between the BWF and the China Badminton Association. CBA didn't pay much attention to BWF and didn't give them any face. if they were to be in good terms, this would never have happened. if they were in good terms, CBA will take the sacrifice to move their winter training, and BWF would also consult CBA of the scheduling.

one of the factor is that CBA is arrogant. but at the current state of badminton, CBA unfortunately is in the position to be arrogant as much of the badminton world relies on the presence strong Chinese players. as phaarix has said, the Chinese would make the SSF much more exciting.

on the other side, BWF has continually trying to dilute the strength of the Chinese players, the strongest and most influential team of the whole professional badminton world. to be honest, that's just a case of BWF shooting themselves in the foot.

perhaps BWF need to hire someone who has more strategic and diplomatic sense. they need to tame the Chinese dragon, make them happy, rely in their strength instead of putting obstacle left and right of them.

.
... I would like our BCers to answer 2 questions here:
(a) Should the SSF be moved to different time of the year so that CHN can participate in it?
(b) Should the SSF be limited to 1 player per event per country so that we can have 8 countries participating in each event?
....
...oh, heck, might as well...btw, i somewhat concur with bananakid's comment that this is similar to the other thread...:p

But to give my 2 sens opinion to the 2 questions above:
a. For one, I like the idea suggested by xXazn_romeoXx in the other thread. Instead of holding a SSF once a year (which BWF absolutely can't realistically accomplished:p), why not hold it every other year; or have it every 3 yr. That way, BWF will have (hopefully) enough time to plan this right.:cool:
And since we know that CHN's squad will most likely hold their winter training from around mid December, why don't BWF schedule the next SS Finale, say 2 weeks before (at end of November/early December). It goes back to the communication and agreement with all the associations & BWF.
Also, in regards to location, perhaps next time, BWF could hold this SS Finale in China and see if CHN's team will support and participate.

b. This, IMO, the BWF needs to re-think again. As kwun also mentioned, what is their goal in this SS Finale? Are they trying to showcase the best in the world or trying to have "equal no. of participants from different countries"? If it's the former, then there will be no quota/limit of players; simply based on the rankings. If it's the latter, then we will come back to the current situation.

Anyway, i think we might've blown this current SS Finale situation a bit out of proportion. As is, this is only an invitational type event as there is no requirement (let alone no ranking points awarded) for the invited/qualified players to participate. I think some of us just want to see the top players compete, one last time, in this so called "The Grand Finale of the Year tourney", as hyped as it is esp. with the unprecedented prize money amount.
For now, i guess, let's just enjoy the players who've shown up for this yr end event. After all, i also have a feeling, some or most of them would also like to take a break/pause/rest during this holiday season.

......And if BWF wants to do this again, then they better prepare it much better the next time!:cool:

I think China has really taught BWF a lesson this time... :p "Wanna limit us to just 2 players/pairs per category eh? Then we don't go to the tournament at all!!!" :p



.
Krisna ... What you have quoted could be exactly what is happening now.

But should we allow our strongest playing nation to dictate how Badminton tournaments should be formatted?

This is how I see CHN thinks. It is "If our team cannot win 'handsomely' by a big margin, then we won't be participating". I have no intention of being disrespectful to CHN, but please tell me if what I see is not true.

CHN always prepares their participation in tournaments as a team. That's the way CHN does things. And we cannot say that that is the wrong way to do things. In fact, I strongly believe that 'Unity brings Strength'.

But should a nation apply this 'unity with strength' philosophy just for its own interest, and disregard our wish to make Badminton a more popular sport worldwide by changing the format so that more nations can be included? I should hope not.

We are here to talk about the development for Badminton tournaments. It is about how tournaments can be organised/formatted for all nations. We are not here to talk about how a nation can dominate our Badminton.

I come from a school quite strong in sporting achievements and academic learnings. My school would often get invitations to participate in many competitions, namely; sports, quizzes, science and mathematics competitions, etc... My school also organised some of these competitions. When we organised our competitions, we would make sure that all schools in our region could be represented. Can you see what I am talking about?

:):):)
.

Kwun makes good sense.

Since the world championships is the sports showcase event, why not shift this to the end of the year instead?

sorry for being devil's advocate. but we have to go back and wonder:

what is the point of the SSF anyway? we already have a yearly world championship. having another SSF seems a bit pointless.

furthermore, although it is announced beforehand, did BWF consult each of the potential country whether they can attend? it doesn't sound like they have.

China did come out to be a bit arrogant for not attending, but there is also no regulation saying that they have to attend. perhaps in the future, BWF should mandate the attendance of the SSF.



.
kwun ... I thought it was the intention of BWF to get our top players to not need their National Associations for financial assistance to enter this SSF. By offering bigger prize money and all expenses paid, BWF is hoping that our top Badminton players can pursue our sport more professionally, just like what professional Tennis players do.

I would guess that BWF did not consult each of the potential countries. I would think that BWF was hoping to attract top players to participate just because all expenses are paid for the players.

This is only my own perception.

:):):)
.

.
kwun ... I thought it was the intention of BWF to get our top players to not need their National Associations for financial assistance to enter this SSF. By offering bigger prize money and all expenses paid, BWF is hoping that our top Badminton players can pursue our sport more professionally, just like what professional Tennis players do.

I would guess that BWF did not consult each of the potential countries. I would think that BWF was hoping to attract top players to participate just because all expenses are paid for the players.

This is only my own perception.

:):):)
.


Stop coming up with these LAME excuses for the BWF... If they are really thinking about bring the REAL TOP players together for a tournament and encourage individualism over nation participation, then why the quota thing again according to nation???????????????????????????????????????????? ???????????????????:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:: rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:: rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:: rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:: rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:: rolleyes::rolleyes:

Stop these excuses before you contradict yourself any further.:(

.
Krisna ... What you have quoted could be exactly what is happening now.

But should we allow our strongest playing nation to dictate how Badminton tournaments should be formatted?

This is how I see CHN thinks. It is "If our team cannot win 'handsomely' by a big margin, then we won't be participating". I have no intention of being disrespectful to CHN, but please tell me if what I see is not true.

CHN always prepares their participation in tournaments as a team. That's the way CHN does things. And we cannot say that that is the wrong way to do things. In fact, I strongly believe that 'Unity brings Strength'.

But should a nation apply this 'unity with strength' philosophy just for its own interest, and disregard our wish to make Badminton a more popular sport worldwide by changing the format so that more nations can be included? I should hope not.

We are here to talk about the development for Badminton tournaments. It is about how tournaments can be organised/formatted for all nations. We are not here to talk about how a nation can dominate our Badminton.

I come from a school quite strong in sporting achievements and academic learnings. My school would often get invitations to participate in many competitions, namely; sports, quizzes, science and mathematics competitions, etc... My school also organised some of these competitions. When we organised our competitions, we would make sure that all schools in our region could be represented. Can you see what I am talking about?

:):):)
.


Seriously, another tournament like SSF ain't going to make other countries(whose population don't give a crap about badminton) want to broadcast the tournament... you can hold any # of badminton tournaments with any speical format in Asia, and none of the African, North/South American, most European countries will give a crap about badminton at all.

People in those countries may be willing to pay $2,000 Euro just to watch a good football game, or a few hundreds in Canada to watch a hockey game... but you can give out free tickets to a badminton event to everyone in say Brazil, Italy, and etc... you still end up with an empty stadium.

Bottom line is those people from those continents just view badminton as a JOKE, and before that is changed, NO Countries will broadcast an event over TV and intent to lose $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ over it. According to Onetoughbirdie's philiosophy, all us oversea fans will just download the matches, watch it on our computer monitor, and scratch our own butt and balls.:crying::crying::crying:

There are several ways to get your point across.
SHOUTING is one of them - but it blurs the message.

Let's aim to keep this civil and even ;)

and if you look at the broader picture. the whole thing also shows how poor the relationship is between the BWF and the China Badminton Association. CBA didn't pay much attention to BWF and didn't give them any face. if they were to be in good terms, this would never have happened. if they were in good terms, CBA will take the sacrifice to move their winter training, and BWF would also consult CBA of the scheduling.

one of the factor is that CBA is arrogant. but at the current state of badminton, CBA unfortunately is in the position to be arrogant as much of the badminton world relies on the presence strong Chinese players. as phaarix has said, the Chinese would make the SSF much more exciting.

on the other side, BWF has continually trying to dilute the strength of the Chinese players, the strongest and most influential team of the whole professional badminton world. to be honest, that's just a case of BWF shooting themselves in the foot.

perhaps BWF need to hire someone who has more strategic and diplomatic sense. they need to tame the Chinese dragon, make them happy, rely in their strength instead of putting obstacle left and right of them.



.
kwun ... Yes, we can clearly see that there is something wrong in the relationship between CBA and BWF. And it is quite frustrating for us Badminton fans to find these 2 bodies not getting along well. Both CBA and BWF are displaying a sense of overbearing self-worth or self-importance of their own.

Clearly, CBA is interested in maintaining their top positions in the world, in events like the Thomas Cup, the Uber Cup, the Sudirman Cup, the Olympic Games, etc... Probably, CBA concentrates on these events because titles are awarded to nations.

To me, the new Super Series organised by the BWF is to reward players, not nations. Perhaps because of this, CBA is not interested.
.

... Instead of holding a SSF once a year (which BWF absolutely can't realistically accomplished:p), why not hold it every other year; or have it every 3 yr. That way, BWF will have (hopefully) enough time to plan this right.:cool: ...

... As kwun also mentioned, what is their goal in this SS Finale? ....



.
ctjcad ... As you can see in my reply to kwun, I think the SSF is organised to reward players, not nations.

It is unfortunate that some players cannot attend because their National Associations say that team achievement is more important than personal achievement, and therefore not permitting their players to participate in the SSF.
.

Since the world championships is the sports showcase event, why not shift this to the end of the year instead?



.
Cheung ... Which one are you referring to? The World Championships or the Super Series Finals?

Yes, a good question: When is it the best time(month of the year) to hold Badminton showcase events?

:):):)
.

Seriously, another tournament like SSF ain't going to make other countries(whose population don't give a crap about badminton) want to broadcast the tournament... you can hold any # of badminton tournaments with any speical format in Asia, and none of the African, North/South American, most European countries will give a crap about badminton at all.



.
bananakid ... Sorry that I have to disagree with you.

From post#5 of this thread:

And after the withdrawal of CHN, the players will be:
Mens Singles (No.1 from country):
1. Lee Chong Wei (MAS)
2. Sony Dwi Kuncoro (INA)
3. Peter Gade (DEN)
4. Lee Hyun ll (KOR)
5. Przemyslaw Wacha (POL)
6. Boonsak Ponsana (THA)
7. Chetan Anand (IDN)
8. Nguyen Tien Minh (VIE)

We all know that currently Badminton is big in 5 countries; namely, China, Denmark, Indonesia, Malaysia and Korea. But if Poland, Thailand, India and Vietnam can get a chance to participate in the SSF, I am sure that their country news media would give a mention about this SSF for Badminton.
.

There are several ways to get your point across.
SHOUTING is one of them - but it blurs the message.

Let's aim to keep this civil and even ;)



.
Oldhand ... You are right. The shouting gave me painful eyes.
.

.
bananakid ... Sorry that I have to disagree with you.

From post#5 of this thread:

And after the withdrawal of CHN, the players will be:
Mens Singles (No.1 from country):
1. Lee Chong Wei (MAS)
2. Sony Dwi Kuncoro (INA)
3. Peter Gade (DEN)
4. Lee Hyun ll (KOR)
5. Przemyslaw Wacha (POL)
6. Boonsak Ponsana (THA)
7. Chetan Anand (IDN)
8. Nguyen Tien Minh (VIE)

We all know that currently Badminton is big in 5 countries; namely, China, Denmark, Indonesia, Malaysia and Korea. But if Poland, Thailand, India and Vietnam can get a chance to participate in the SSF, I am sure that their country news media would give a mention about this SSF for Badminton.
.


I can't see how even if you put Andrew.D(of Canada), or Howard Bach(of U.S) or anybody else from North America will all of a sudden motivate any T.V channel to broadcast any badminton matches(or any highlights) in North America whatsoever... even if you put the entire Brazilian soccer team in a badminton court, they probably won't broadcast it in Brazil either. It's like they never show any highlights from the American "super bowl" in countries that don't give a crap about it.

Bottom line is if the people of a country are not interested in badminton, then there is no way in hell that any T.V network is dumb enough to show it no matter how many participants(from that nations) there are in the tournament.

In Canada, they won't even show the smallest clip of highlights from any badminton tournament whatsoever, not just the big sport channels, EVEN the small Chinese station won't show any badminton highlights in their news broadcast... that's how bad of an image badminton has.

Like I said, until the day badminton can be viewed(by the public, not me... I love badminton myself) as being more than a "SISSY" sport being played by overweight people, housewives, seniors, or people without any athletic abilities... badminton will only grow within Asia.

Let me show you some proof of how western societies view badminton:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYFtDt2TU-s&feature=channel_page (time: 1:45, then 2:21 to 2:45) by the way, this cartoon was made before the 21 point system was introduced... and they couldn't even figure out the scoring system of badminton at the time.

In one episode of Simpsons.... Homer and Merge were playing badminton in their BACKYARD with the Indian couple!!! Way to go!!! badminton!!!!!!!



By the way, Thailand, India, Vietnam are all Asian countries... can we look further away from Asia???

Out of over 100 countries in the world... only Asia + England, France, Russia, Ireland, Poland, Sweden???, U.S, Canada and maybe a few more, even have representatives in a super series type of tournament. Nobody can tell me this sport is a worldwide sport(unless you are only counting the mileage between countries), because it is not as popular as one thinks... as a backyard game, maybe... but definitely not from a sport event perspective.

.
ctjcad ... As you can see in my reply to kwun, I think the SSF is organised to reward players, not nations.
....
..esp. in this SSF. But actually my notion goes more than that, which i've mentioned following the question "what is their goal in this SS Finale?".:)

.
To me, the new Super Series organised by the BWF is to reward players, not nations. Perhaps because of this, CBA is not interested.
.

ccc,

this is an interesting discussion that may touch on the fundamentals of how the professional badminton associations are structured.

firstly, i'd like to clarify why you think the SS/SSF is there to reward players instead of nations.

ccc is flip-floping just to put down Chinese badminton. In one thread it's the nations; in another, it's the players.

I think it should be clear that SS is for the players. National interests in badminton are already well served by WC and the three cups.

Given the player-centric nature of SS, that's why I consider the 2-entry limit for the grand finale a hostile gesture. A 4-entry limit is more reasonable. I don't think the Chinese team qualifies more than three entries in any events anyway. It is mostly one or two, even without any limit.

.
Oldhand ... You are right. The shouting gave me painful eyes.
.
same here..:(:(:(

...even if you put the entire Brazilian soccer team in a badminton court, they probably won't broadcast it in Brazil either.

Haha I would be pretty surprised if they didn't. I know if the All Blacks (rugby team) went and did something crazy like that, New Zealand would definitely cover it in some way. Great entertainment :).

ccc is flip-floping just to put down Chinese badminton. In one thread it's the nations; in another, it's the players.

I think it should be clear that SS is for the players. National interests in badminton are already well served by WC and the three cups.

Given the player-centric nature of SS, that's why I consider the 2-entry limit for the grand finale a hostile gesture. A 4-entry limit is more reasonable. I don't think the Chinese team qualifies more than three entries in any events anyway. It is mostly one or two, even without any limit.

let's not make any accusations and finger pointing. we want to foster civilized discussion and not start a fight.

Tony Gunawan is upset - very very upset.
The New Straits Times (http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Thursday/Sport/2431057/Article/index_html) has his interview :)

Tony Gunawan is upset - very very upset.
The New Straits Times (http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Thursday/Sport/2431057/Article/index_html) has his interview :)
Not being part of the Olympic grind and at the tail end of his career, TG is in a different position from other players. He is free to chase prizes while the others are preparing for their careers in the next few years.

I don't mean disrespect to TG. He is still a force and his presence can enhance any competition.

I am still puzzled by how a hastily put togther tourney in a badminton hotbed can promote badminton further. At a time when the players are desperate for a rest, why scheduling two matches a day? The "avoiding injury" explanation sounds more and more reasonable.

Not being part of the Olympic grind and at the tail end of his career, TG is in a different position from other players. He is free to chase prizes while the others are preparing for their careers in the next few years.

I don't mean disrespect to TG. He is still a force and his presence can enhance any competition.

I am still puzzled by how a hastily put togther tourney in a badminton hotbed can promote badminton further. At a time when the players are desperate for a rest, why scheduling two matches a day? The "avoiding injury" explanation sounds more and more reasonable.
There are some discussions that BWF may reduce the number of Super Series and adding more prize money...

..i sort of mentioned abt it a long while back in one of the threads, as one option BWF can possibly explore. It will not only reduce the number of travel-related expenditures and possible injuries, but w/the limited number of SS events it'll make them even more imperative to attend. The increased prize money is an added enticement..The concept will be more like tennis' four big grand salami events..;):cool:

kwun ... Yes, we can clearly see that there is something wrong in the relationship between CBA and BWF. And it is quite frustrating for us Badminton fans to find these 2 bodies not getting along well. Both CBA and BWF are displaying a sense of overbearing self-worth or self-importance of their own.

Clearly, CBA is interested in maintaining their top positions in the world, in events like the Thomas Cup, the Uber Cup, the Sudirman Cup, the Olympic Games, etc... Probably, CBA concentrates on these events because titles are awarded to nations.

To me, the new Super Series organised by the BWF is to reward players, not nations. Perhaps because of this, CBA is not interested.





ccc,

this is an interesting discussion that may touch on the fundamentals of how the professional badminton associations are structured.

firstly, i'd like to clarify why you think the SS/SSF is there to reward players instead of nations.



.
kwun ... Why do I think the SSF tournament is there to reward players instead of nations?

Well, it is because the SSF invites players individually, when these players get to qualify, based on their SS Ranking points. All expenses are paid for, to the participants. Participants do not need their National Associations to food their bills.

If you remember what I mentioned in Post#11 in this thread, namely:
"I come from a school quite strong in sporting achievements and academic learnings. My school would often get invitations to participate in many competitions, namely; sports, quizzes, science and mathematics competitions, etc... My school also organised some of these competitions. When we organised our competitions, we would make sure that all schools in our region could be represented."

At my time, many of us students in our region decided to do something for ourselves and not just for our schools. We would raise funds to help fellow students to participate in our competitions. We tried not to use/exhaust our schools' budget.

We looked at us students challenging each other, regardless of which school we come from. But of course, from each school, fellow schoolmates would choose one who is best suited to be the representative. And we try to involve as many schools as possible in our region to participate, but only one representative from each school.

And the reward goes to the representative, not the school.

:):):)
.

Tony Gunawan is upset - very very upset.
The New Straits Times (http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Thursday/Sport/2431057/Article/index_html) has his interview :)



.
Oldhand ... I can see why TG is upset. He is thinking for our players and for our sport.

He doesn't wish to have political parties, like National Associations, to cause problems to our sport.

Badminton should be best organised for our players, not our National Associations.

:):):)
.

.
...At my time, many of us students in our region decided to do something for ourselves and not just for our schools. We would raise funds to help fellow students to participate in our competitions. We tried not to use/exhaust our schools' budget.
....
..the concept is almost the same as BWF, except, it's the opposite/reversed. BWF, as the main body, is providing the funds while your school did not. In other words, you guys were like BWF, raising the funds for others.;)

There are some discussions that BWF may reduce the number of Super Series and adding more prize money...



.
huangkwokhau ... Hope that BWF can do that.

Just finding some players, like WMC, still eager to participate in the 2008 SSF, even though injured, is quite unbelievable.

Reduce the quantity, but increase the quality should be a better policy.
.

...i sort of mentioned abt it a long while back in one of the threads, as one option BWF can possibly explore. It will not only reduce the number of travel-related expenditures and possible injuries, but w/the limited number of SS events it'll make them even more imperative to attend. The increased prize money is an added enticement..The concept will be more like tennis' four big grand salami events..;):cool:



.
ctjcad ... You are correct.

In fact, many Tennis players prepare themselves for the 4 Grand Slams with greater intensity/effort than they do for the Tennis International Davis Cup.

:):):)
.

..the concept is almost the same as BWF, except, it's the opposite/reversed. BWF, as the main body, is providing the funds while your school did not. In other words, you guys were like BWF, raising the funds for others.;)



.
ctjcad ... If BWF does not raise its own funds for players, then BWF will have to depend on Nationals Associations to sponsor our Badminton.

And our Badminton players would not be independent and free, like players in other sports like Tennis, Golf, Soccer, Basketball, etc...
.

The key point is that badminton, unfortunately, is still a country-based (not individual-based) sport. Among the "big 5", China and Korea are totally country-based, Malaysia and Indonesia have a little flavor of individualism, Europe is OK, but it's too weak to affect anything.

Due to this situation, any tournament is "important" to a team only if it will affect the country (for example, any tournament with OG ranking points is very important). As a consequence, SSF is a totally meaningless tournament to any team that is country-based. This is why China and Korea do not care about it, and may choose to not participate due to any arbitrary reason.

It is clear that the poor participation is not due to "quota". OG has quota, WC has quota, AG has quota, we didn't see Team China chose to stay home during those event, did we?

To me, the only hope for badminton is that China establish a good league.

.
Greetings,

Much have been said about CHN not interested in participating in the SSF tournament.

I see 2 main points here:
(1) The reason CHN gave for not participating in the SSF is because they said the SSF clashed with their team training session.
(2) The reason BWF gave for limiting the number of entries from each nation in the SSF is because they wanted as many countries as possible to participate in it.

I would like our BCers to answer 2 questions here:
(a) Should the SSF be moved to different time of the year so that CHN can participate in it?
(b) Should the SSF be limited to 1 player per event per country so that we can have 8 countries participating in each event?

In (a), I can see that CHN is following the seasonal year, while BWF is following the calendar year. But, Badminton is lucky because we play it indoor. So tournaments and/or training sessions could be rescheduled to different times of the year.

In (b), I would like to see that the SSF be organised for the No.1's from each country competing against each other. To enhance international rivalry, organising the No.1's from countries playing against each other is definitely better. And it should get many nationalistic fans more enthused. However, in terms of skill demonstration, watching the No.1 and No.2 from CHN might be better. They are currently the strongest nation in Badminton.

What are your thoughts/answers to questions (a) and (b)?

:):):)
.

The key point is that badminton, unfortunately, is still a country-based (not individual-based) sport. ...
Until the big monies are rolling in in troves, the backing of associations and government bodies are crucial.

However, on the specific topic of SS Masters participation, it is less of a "country-based" issue but more of a logistics issue.

The Chinese team was so exhausted after the Olympics. China Master was attended by essentially the B team. Skipping China Open was briefly entertained :eek:. Many of their top players are not fit physically or mentally to compete at a high level. They just want to shut down and get into their winter training routine.

We know that TH was forced to come by his sponsors. LCW and WMC are good soldiers. They didn't and couldn't back out for obvious reasons.

When you look at the big picture, skipping this event may be one of the more humane decisions made by the Chinese Team, in the interest of long term health and performance of the players.

Not that I like this decision, but I do think there are plausible and reasonable explanations such that this regrettable decision should be respected.

So you are saying Chinese players are not "good soldiers"? :D Seriously, if team China is "exhausted" due to OG, who is not? if TH came because of sponsor pressure, why did MK/HS come? Why did JJS/LYD come? Why did PG come? They all attended OG, didn't they?

The key is still that this SSF is a meaningless tournament. It's meaningful at the individual level, thanks to the big money, but it's meaningless at the country/team level, and country/team is the boss in China.

Say it this way. Teams chose to do their "winter training" instead of attending SSF shows exactly that this SSF is not important to them. Otherwise they would change their training schedule. Do you ever see a European soccer club skip UEFA Champion League because its players are too tired to perform at their best? :cool:

Until the big monies are rolling in in troves, the backing of associations and government bodies are crucial.

However, on the specific topic of SS Masters participation, it is less of a "country-based" issue but more of a logistics issue.

The Chinese team was so exhausted after the Olympics. China Master was attended by essentially the B team. Skipping China Open was briefly entertained :eek:. Many of their top players are not fit physically or mentally to compete at a high level. They just want to shut down and get into their winter training routine.

We know that TH was forced to come by his sponsors. LCW and WMC are good soldiers. They didn't and couldn't back out for obvious reasons.

When you look at the big picture, skipping this event may be one of the more humane decisions made by the Chinese Team, in the interest of long term health and performance of the players.

Not that I like this decision, but I do think there are plausible and reasonable explanations such that this regrettable decision should be respected.

If you don't understand the pressure and fatigue the OG brought to the Chinese people in general and the sports people in particular, there is not much more to say. As much as they loved the Beijing Olympics, it seems to me that not many Chinese people want another OG in China any time soon.

If some people insist on SS Masters being the top and most prestigious tournament on schedule, that's another dead-end for discussion. In time, it may well be. Right now, it is not even a regular event on the schedule.

Even at the individual level, an athlete has to balance between long term career and short term gains. You have to give TH and WMC full credit for attending. There are many forces at work. I don't think there is a clear cut decision. Players drop out of regularly scheduled meets all the time. Just look at the withdrawal threads in here.

Please don't be ridiculous with soccer example, the training season for Euro soccer is in the summer. Winter is the mid season.

Are you saying only Chinese players are exhausted? :eek: I have mentioned MK/HS, JJS/LYD, PG, they all attended OG and yet they attended the SSF. In fact, many Chinese players attend quite a few SS events after OG. If fatigue is the main reason, why did they attend those tournaments?

I don't know others but what I am saying is why this SSF is not "the top and most pretigious" (in fact far far away from it) -- I never "insisted" that SSF is an important tournament. The reason is that tournaments for individuals do not have much "growth space" in the current country-based system.

One solution may be to cancel World Championship; The other is to pray that the Chinese league will grow into the badminton NBA -- although it hasn't been born yet LOL.

Ever think about why the training season for soccer is in summer? Because that is the only time available. If you take that away, no training time anymore. They train in summer because other times there are important matches to play, not the other way around.

Btw how can the 4-day SSF seriously affect a 3-month winter training session? LOL.

If you don't understand the pressure and fatigue the OG brought to the Chinese people in general and the sports people in particular, there is not much more to say. As much as they loved the Beijing Olympics, it seems to me that not many Chinese people want another OG in China any time soon.

If some people insist on SS Masters being the top and most prestigious tournament on schedule, that's another dead-end for discussion. In time, it may well be. Right now, it is not even a regular event on the schedule.

Even at the individual level, an athlete has to balance between long term career and short term gains. You have to give TH and WMC full credit for attending. There are many forces at work. I don't think there is a clear cut decision. Players drop out of regularly scheduled meets all the time. Just look at the withdrawal threads in here.

Please don't be ridiculous with soccer example, the training season for Euro soccer is in the summer. Winter is the mid season.

.
ctjcad ... If BWF does not raise its own funds for players, then BWF will have to depend on Nationals Associations to sponsor our Badminton.

And our Badminton players would not be independent and free, like players in other sports like Tennis, Golf, Soccer, Basketball, etc...
.
..i was doing a comparison between what BWF/national associations are doing & what you guys did (having fundraising and shelling out money out of your own pockets). Opposite.

Btw, here's the discussion on the idea of having less SS tourneys but more prize money as an option:
http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=46078
And as we find out now, the scheduling, this yr, is really turning into almost prophetic..:p

Btw, here's the discussion on the idea of having less SS tourneys but more prize money as an option:
http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=46078
And as we find out now, the scheduling, this yr, is really turning into almost prophetic..:p
Good thread. BWF is killing the geese that lay golden eggs. What were they thinking?

When you look at the big picture, skipping this event may be one of the more humane decisions made by the Chinese Team, in the interest of long term health and performance of the players.

Not that I like this decision, but I do think there are plausible and reasonable explanations such that this regrettable decision should be respected.



.
RedShuttle ... It is not that we are saying that we are not concerned about our players' health and/or fitness. In fact, for this 2008 SSF, many have expressed concerns about the injuries carried by WMC and TH, when both of them decided to participate.

To me, the beauty here is that individual players can decide for themselves, even though their decisions may be seen to be 'foolish'. But, it is the freedom and the independence of the players that we are talking about here.

Yes, talking about the CHN team, IMHO, many of their players are found lacking in fitness.
It should be good for CHN to take a break. However, talking about Lin Dan, he is as fit and as capable as we can well see.. But just because some of his teammates are in poorer condition, CHN decides for the their whole team to not participate in the 2008 SSF, I can only say that this is just not right for Lin Dan.
.

I don't think we want to turn BC into an ideology forum, at least not in a "Badminton Tournaments" forum.

There are always gives and takes in this world, with a sponsor or with the national badminton association. If one is "free" to oblige to the sponsor, one is also "free" to oblige to the national association.

The scenario of LD's saying "No" to the badminton association is neither here nor there. Let's just not waste time on it in this forum.

Back to badminton for a moment, LD is prominently among those who are obviously distracted from badminton since the OG. You see a lot more beauty shots of LD than badminton photos. The Chinese team pull itself together for the China Open only because it was the first time Shanghai hosting the event. Other than that, there has not been anything close to a full Chinese team in competition since the OG.

As I said, many outside people may not understand the toll the OG took on Chinese athletes. Remember the quote: "if Liu Xiang does not win gold at the Beijing Olympics, all his past accomplishments amount to nothing"? Those "past accomplishments" included setting a world record to win gold at Athens Olympics. I don't think all Chinese officials are that idiotic. But you can get a sense of the tremendous pressure the Chinese athletes were under. They were liberated after the OG. You have to forgive them (especially those having the duty to win at the OG, like the badminton team) for not focusing on sports until they reset in the off season.

hmm, what do u guys think of this article from nst (http://http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Sunday/Sport/2433353/Article/pppull_index_html).? the opinion by boopathy:p

BWF must flex its muscles to ensure growth


2008/12/21

FOR a sport that is desperate to maintain its Olympic status, the Badminton World Federation (BWF) sure has a strange approach in marketing and promoting events. The Super Series Masters Finals, which ends in Kota Kinabalu today, is a case in point. Supposed to be the EVENT to bring the badminton season to a close, the inaugural championships were turned into a sideshow instead as a host of withdrawals, led by China, saw a diluted field competing in Kota Kinabalu.

Even the total prize money of US$500,000 (RM1.74 million) -- the richest on the circuit -- failed to act as a lure and the BWF has admitted that it has to share part of the blame.

BWF was late in securing a sponsor and this led to invitations being delayed, thus making it easier for China and South Korea to withdraw.

The official reason both gave was that their players are already in centralised training camp for the start of the 2009 season and BWF, other than slapping a US$250 fine, is powerless to do anything.

Can you imagine an international federation being so weak? Imagine if European champions Manchester United had decided not to play in the ongoing Fifa World Club Championship in Japan?

The football world agrees that it is an irrelevant tournament but yet, United are competing for if they didn't, Fifa would have come down hard on them.

This is what BWF lacks -- clout -- thus leaving it at the mercy of its affiliates who can pick and choose just about everything -- including deciding which player should win a particular tournament.

This has happened before and will happen again, especially when the qualifying period for either the World Championships or Olympics is about to end.

But the BWF will be powerless to act and really, given the lack of professionalism seen in the organising of the Super Series Masters Finals, this shouldn't come as a surprise.

Having picked the year-end holiday season to hold the event, BWF has squeezed the competition into four days from the normal five and some players have had to play three matches a day with Malaysia's Wong Pei Tty one of the victims.

She partnered Chin Eei Hui in the women's doubles and Lim Khim Wah in the mixed and after a long season, this is not the way to end the year and the gruelling Masters Finals schedule leaves her vulnerable to injuries.

No doubt, it was Pei Tty's choice to play but this was a choice many others were not willing to take and this has resulted in the fans, the world over, being cheated of top quality action.

The Masters Finals are being telecast live on satellite television and the absence of most of the world's top players mean not only are the fans left without the possibility of seeing a Lin Dan-Lee Chong Wei showdown but the sponsors who came to BWF's rescue must also be wondering whether they made the right move in extending their support.

This can't go on, especially as certain nations are also fond of withdrawing their players from other Super Series tournaments and BWF has to flex its muscles if it wants to see badminton continue growing.

Already, there is speculation that badminton could be one of those in danger of being dropped from the Olympic programme in 2016.

While BWF officials are confident this won't happen, they can't take anything for granted as other sports, including squash, are lobbying hard for inclusion into the 2016 Olympics.

It is a fact that at the International Olympic Committee level, what moves and shakes is influence and if BWF can't even get its affiliates to toe the line, how is it going to impress the 100-over IOC officials who decide which sport should be on the programme.

BWF has promised it will tighten its rules and regulations next year but it must not be mere cosmetic changes for the Olympic future of a sport that is certainly more exciting than table tennis and even tennis, depends on its international federation being dynamic.

BWF must flex its muscles to ensure growth
But the BWF will be powerless to act and really, given the lack of professionalism seen in the organising of the Super Series Masters Finals, this shouldn't come as a surprise.
This is pretty much the core of the problem. BWF must get its own act together first to gain credibility and respect. Clout and power will follow.

hmm, what do u guys think of this article from nst (http://http://www.nst.com.my/Current_News/NST/Sunday/Sport/2433353/Article/pppull_index_html).? the opinion by boopathy:p



.
george@chongwei ... Thank you for the article.

To me, BWF has been going for quantity, not quality.
CHN, on the other hand, is going for quality, not quantity.

It is now up to BWF to work on our 2010 tournament schedule, but not the 2009 schedule because it has already been released. Hope that no last moment changes will be affecting the 2009 schedule, otherwise confusion will set in. Below, is the 2009 schedule.

12 Super Series events:
1. Malaysia
2. Korea
3. All England
4. Switzerland
5. Singapore
6. Indonesia
7. China (1)
8. Japan
9. Denmark
10. France
11. Hong Kong
12. China (2)
13. Super Series Masters Finals

6 GP Gold events:
1. India
2. Philippines
3. Thailand
4. Macau
5. Taipei
6. Netherlands

8 GP events:
1. Germany
2. Canada
3. USA
4. New Zealand
5. Vietnam
6. Netherlands
7. Russia
8. Bitburger

And not to forget that in 2009, there are also...
World Championships
Sudirman Cup
International Series
International Challenges
Asian Continental Championships
European Mixed Team Championships
etc......

So, talking about our 2009 schedule... I ask you "Aren't we having too many Badminton events?"
.

I guess now we can say BWF is taking some serious action over those who withdraw from the tournaments. I refer to the article from nst today. A fine of US$1,000 for the player... in part it does seems unfair for the player since they are not in total responsible for their withdrawal if it was the assoc.'s decision... but then again maybe it's the only way to control those associations from not sending their players to the tournament. What do you think? And a change of format in the Uber/Thomas cup in next 2010. I look forward for more... :D

I guess now we can say BWF is taking some serious action over those who withdraw from the tournaments. I refer to the article from nst today. A fine of US$1,000 for the player... in part it does seems unfair for the player since they are not in total responsible for their withdrawal if it was the assoc.'s decision... but then again maybe it's the only way to control those associations from not sending their players to the tournament. What do you think? And a change of format in the Uber/Thomas cup in next 2010. I look forward for more... :D

Stronger enforcement is good. But what they enforce must be reasonable to start with.

How does one register and withdraw from an event? If the penalty for withdrawal is too severe, it may discourage registration in the first place.

It's funny that China was used in the example to deliberately finish 2nd and be forced to face a strong team. Give me a break :rolleyes:

Don't they have better things to do, such as promoting the game and bringing up the level of play in Europe, Americas and Africa, than finding new ways to limit the Chinese team :confused:

Stronger enforcement is good. But what they enforce must be reasonable to start with.

How does one register and withdraw from an event? If the penalty for withdrawal is too severe, it may discourage registration in the first place.

It's funny that China was used in the example to deliberately finish 2nd and be forced to face a strong team. Give me a break :rolleyes:

Don't they have better things to do, such as promoting the game and bringing up the level of play in Europe, Americas and Africa, than finding new ways to limit the Chinese team :confused:

Hmm.... from my understanding, what they're trying to do is to make more countries able to participate in the badminton tournaments... and i didnt see it as ways to limit china players... it's just so happen china comes out with more players than other countries... but if we really want the sport to grow, let's just not limit it to one country with most athletes... if so, then badminton will never grow... and your hope to see those underlines countries to participate will surely remain a dream....but again, it's just my personal thought. :cool:

...your hope to see those underlines countries to participate will surely remain a dream...
Dream or reality, that should be the main mission of BWF. So get on with it already!

If the spots vacated by China are taken up by other badminton savvy countries, how does it let in more countries?

If these spots are just given to countries not interested in badminton, whose players will likely exit in the first round with less than 10 points in two games. These players may not even live in the countries they represent, let alone promoting the game there.

Countries have high numbers of elite players, e.g. doubles teams from INA, MAS, or KOR, should be rewarded with additional entries as well, not restricted more than the current quota.

I think the current three in the top four rule should be modified to three in the top six or eight. With that, the BWF can and should come down hard on any overt manipulation of results. A team can still withdraw certain players from an event but whoever there must perform to the best of their abilities, no matter who the opponents are.

Rather than putting on any new limit, I'd put in an obligation that teams with extra spots must contribute to a coaching pool used at the discretion of BWF to send help to countries that need help. That's an offer that no body should decline.

Hmm.... from my understanding, what they're trying to do is to make more countries able to participate in the badminton tournaments... and i didnt see it as ways to limit china players... it's just so happen china comes out with more players than other countries... but if we really want the sport to grow, let's just not limit it to one country with most athletes... if so, then badminton will never grow... and your hope to see those underlines countries to participate will surely remain a dream....but again, it's just my personal thought. :cool:



.
eRa@에라 ... That's exactly what I prefer to see, that is for us to allow more countries be able to participate. I believe that this is a good way for Badminton to become a global sport.

If the SSF are always found with players from just 5 nations, CHN, DEN, INA, MAS and KOR, then Badminton will remain popular only in these few countries. Badminton will stay like these sports, namely; Baseball, Softball, Cricket, Bowling, etc...

By the way, it was good to see Hong Kong winning the Womens Singles at the 2008 SSF.

In an earlier post(Post#20), I mentioned that a 'one competitor per category per country' rule might be a good idea. Judo will be doing just that for the coming 2012 Olympic Games (see attachment).
.

I would like to think badminton is a mainstream sport while Judo is more obscure. Badminton does not need to mimic Judo.

All these quota scheming is for increasing the number of nations on the podium, not the nations in the OG. The current rule allows at most one country with 3 spots. Decreasing that to 2 will free up a maximum of 5 spots (3 is a more likely scenario, like the Beijing OG), to players most people do not know and will not hear again, including their own countrymen.

Softball got kicked out of OG because it is just not popular. The US is virtually assured the gold medal does not help but it is really not the main cause.

Europeans and Americans dominated badminton in the early part of history. It is not like any quota system brought Asians into dominance today.

BWF should just promote the game better in the rest of world. All badminton savvy nations should help out to train players from the badminton-poor nations. Only when they have credible heros, the people in those countries would take more interest, not when their totally outclassed countrymen got ambarrased at the OG.

Don't want to beat up on SS Masters any more (some good games indeed). But wouldn't it be better to hold this in Europe or North America? Look at where tennis holds its year-end Masters event.