I voted yes. In single, I am on my own. However, in doubles, I have another pair of eyes on the court. Having one more person on the court, reduce my court coverage area. I can afford to be more aggressive.
Hi, My "no" vote is more like "yes and no". I am an attacking player, with good stamina. If something kills me in long singles rallies, it is inefficient footwork rather than lack of stamina. That is the "no" part. As for "yes" part, doubles is indeed a different game than singles, so a clean "no" doesn't fit. I think doubles is played even more with your head than singles is. Different goals, different tactics, and most obviously, different movements on the court. As for attacks, I guess I'd wait longer until I attck in singles than in doubles.
hehe...yes. singles is indeed on your own, so you should play to your strengths, and partly to your opponents weaknesses. doubles, you have a partner. if he is better than you overall...then no worries at all, just play how you like, or how they want you to if they have some weaknesses, i feel it is more important to try and make up for them by using tactics, and an overall strategy in the game. obviously if the other pair aren't that good, then just play, but trying to train certain shots, mentality and tactics in the game. lol....and in singles the opponents can't keep hitting it to the weaker player :crying:
whenever i play doubles i too tend to rush everyshot..mostly trying to attack every shuttle sometimes it really catches my opponent by surprise but mostly it hits the net because some shots are to low and i have no time so adjust to the angle to tap it over the net,however when i play singles im a patient player.i allow my opponenet to attack me while i am contented with defending his shots and playing him around the net or lobbing till i spot any gap created by opponent or any mistake and then attack from then on.i dont know why i do that to im only an amateur but i guess singles is all about having control of the game so i think that is the easiest way of getting control as smashing all the time in singles will make me tired after the first and second game if its down to the rubber set i will definetely not have the strength,while in doubles my partner is still able to cover for me.
I says yes singles and doubles are different! just because i used to play alot of singles which led me to my doubles but now... when i go back to Sinles im just way to lazy to do anything... I know I can be to it just because i can't think of getting to the corners! All i can say is Doubles it is all about communitcation with your partner without saying anything aloud. And Doubles has a alot of smashes because you have another person to look at the bird so i can be more aggressive and smash more.. But in the end i believe that singles need a lot of endrance. But in doubles, i use fakes to win the game. Just smashing can't win and also smashing wastes energy way too fast... ~ my 2 cents
deception? When i think about doubles, deception is very, very, risky. It's all about maintaining the attack, unless you have crazy defence. I think doubles is more skill, and singles is more tactics. I really just feel it, can't explain.
in singles, the game is much slower, so you have more time to get prepared. however in doubles, when your opponents serve low, it comes to you very fast because its so near, you have to be mentally prepared to push the bird well otherwise it would be difficult to win in doubles
I voted yes, because of the different pace. Singles is a lot slower... like... a lot when compared to doubles. In doubles, your partner can intercept shots and block shots and reactions would be a lot faster. In singles, there's a lot of waiting. The pace alone changes my mentality. Sometimes, it's hard to change from a singles mentality to a doubles mentality and vice versa and that screws up my game sometimes.
I voted yes, definately. I don't want to repeat all the good points all brought up, so that's it for that. but just to add, I've noticed that one of the differences is in terms of 'comfort level' of joining a game... for example, if i'm a beginner-intermediate, i'll feel more comfortable of joining a doubles game of three relatively advanced players. In contrast, it will be tougher to play against a single advanced player in singles. In that sense, in terms of recreational purposes (not tournaments or anything, just 'for fun') it's less mental strain to play doubles with different skill levels than it is to play singles, in my opinion.
oh I agree to that also.... cause the comfort zone is there.... plus we might learn a few things from that advanced players' game.... but yea, it is so much harder to switch from singles to doubles.... n' vice versa.... namely I am in control of my side of the court, having a partner sometimes could be troublesome....
Really?! I thought it's the other way around. Doubles requires far more tactics than singles cuz you gotta work well with your partner. You can get away with being a little less skilled than your opponents. Sometimes, you could get by with a stronger partner but in singles there's nobody to help you out when you make a bad shot. Also, how could you employ your tactics if your skills couldn't deliver them. This applies to doubles as well as singles, however I suspect that the lower skillset might be more acutely felt in singles than doubles.
I agree, doubles feels more 'tactical' than singles does. In singles, I find that good basic skills is a key, there's only one opponent covering the entire court, so often there are a lot more open holes in his position which you can try for-- no 'strategy' invloved. You can see the holes, and your opponent can see the holes. In contrast, doubles has two people covering your targets, so you need to be able to see the holes and actually hit them. And if there are no holes, you have to play a move or two in advance to get them out of position to make yourself an opening...The holes in singles are definately more apparent, the ones in doubles take some getting used to since you've got to force them out, and that's what i consider the 'strategy' involved in a doubles game.
doubles play can feel like a real fight sometimes. but in singles, to me, it can almost feel like the rally is a dance.
I also agree with this (I voted yes). I find that in singles aswell as tactics and techniques you need to be physically fit, more so than doubles. Often when I play singles (normally against my doubles partner) it comes down to a matter of stamina, endurance and speed over tactics (though they still are hugely important). After gruelling rallies (singles), when I find myself exhausted its motivation and determination that I need to carry on with the next point, as well as better stamina, whereas in doubles I find that a lot more falls on tactics rather than physical ability, hitting those tight net shots and trying to force the short lift to end the rally. So between doubles and singles I take two completely different attitudes, in singles I try to motivate myself and in doubles I focus on tactics and hitting the "correct" shot. Azwok.
When it's singles, I usually take advantage of the opponent's footwork. I also usually take advantage of their edurance. That article in the techniques section was useful. Here's the site: http://www.badmintoncentral.com/badminton-central/content/view/15/35/ Thanks Mag for writing that! For doubles I just take advantage of the chaos. If you hit the shuttle to the middle of the court, there's a chance that the two might try to hit the shuttle. I usually do this with more inexperienced players. This is what I also hate in doubles. There's this constant confusion.
I don't know for you guys, but for myself, being two people on court at once can somehow give the players a "safer" feeling. Of course, the tactics and all are different, as so many have mentioned, but I'd also like to bring up the psychological aspects. When playing, it always help to hear someone cheering and supporting you, whether it's the audience, the coach or the partner. In singles, I would tend to feel rather stressed because all the pressure rests on my shoulders. In a losing situation, fear would start to creep into me because I would keep discovering, then forgetting, then discovering again, that the area to cover is really big and this really freaks me out. Whereas doubles relax me more because the players have mutual support. Through encouraging and receiving encouragements, one's confidence builds up quickly and easily.
But if you are trying to maintain the attack or whatever , don't you need more tactics so that you and your partner can set up a chance to kill < attack > ? Skill is important in placement-wise ( getting the shuttlecock to where you want it to go ) , but in order to know where best to place it , it would require mental / tactics .
Don't know about your meaning of deception. Personally, I think that deception is an integral part of the sport... singles or doubles. Deception means giving your opponents little to no signs to telegraph your intentions. It could also means misinformation or misdirection (the more obvious ones) but you have to be quick and really experienced to do those things against higher calibre players. IMO, you have accomplished minimal deception if all your overhead strokes are identical as the other side have no way of anticipating your shots... that means they have to wait until you actually hit the shuttle before they move.
hi, i am a new member to the forum. I believe it does need 2 completely contrasting mentality for doubles and singles. I am more of a doubles player and would always be willing to smash most of the shuttles and perhaps the same may not be true in singles since getting back to net after smashing needs a lot of quickness. Also i heard somehwere that the professional doubles player are made to practice boxing to improve their ferociousness.
Welcome to the forum gama1234 ~! < cappy , I think the answer to why BethuneGuy thinks deception is risky is the same reason why playing cross court shots in doubles are risky = not only are you fooling your opponents , but you might be decepting your partner as well ... just a thought >