is there any match you can refer me to where that occurs so i can see what you mean? I've always been told that a lift should be all the way to the back of the court, and then it has to be quite high. I'd have thought a lift that isn't that high, would not go far and could get smashed. I tend to play doubles.
More of a singles thing for sure. It should always go to the back of the court. The idea of a flat lift is that it's just out of the opponent's reach in the midcourt, forcing them to twist, turn, or jump for the shuttle.
The phrase "stop drop" refers to the deceptive action used in order to hit a slow drop shot. You use the body to feign a powerful smash, but end up hitting a slow dropshot with a usually flat trajectory (you have often jumped to make it look like a jumping smash). The stop drop, like any slower drop shot, could be played at a spectrum of speeds (but is usually considered quite slow), and the trajectory could start off flat, a little up, or a little down, depending on court positioning, skill and intent (i.e. a choice!). Do not confuse "slow drops" and "stop drops". A stop drop is an advanced hitting skill (when done properly) that uses deception to hide a slow drop shot i.e. the stop drop specifically includes the deception before the shot itself.
Neither (or both) are/could be a stop drop. A stop drop is achieved more by the action of the racquet rather than the trajectory of the shuttle. I was going to post that it is more racquet action than the trajectory but wasn't sure. Good to know it wasn't just in my head
I can't refer you to a specific match, but a flat lift should just be considered a "lift that travels with a flatter trajectory". The lift still moves upwards (and hence is still a lift) but the priority is to hit the shuttle lower and faster, so that it arrives at the back of the court quicker. This of course means that if played in the wrong situation, it can be more easily intercepted before it reaches the back line. Many people forget the purpose of different shots: standard lifts are intended to get your opponent to move out the back of the court prior to hitting their shot. Flat lifts are intended to get deep to the corners quickly, where some height is needed (perhaps to avoid the net player, or for a safer trajectory of shot if taken low), but where a drive was not possible (because the low trajectory makes it ineffective for some reason). e.g. if someone smashes straight at me, and I want to get the shuttle quickly cross court to the back corner, a drive could work as long as the net player isn't very good. However, if the net player is good, I need to play a lift to get it to the cross court back corner. I have a choice of hitting it high, or a choice of hitting is slightly flatter so that it arrives faster. Hitting high allows my opponents more time to recover, so I may choose a flat lift to make my shot arrive more quickly. Hope that clears things up for you!
Thanks.. Is there any textual source like a book or handbook or standard, that mentions the term "stop drop", and mentions those lift shots I have PDFs of UKCCLevel1Handbook , BWF Coaches Manual Level 1, BWF Coaches Manual Level 2, But none of them mention the terms "stop drop" or "flat lift".
If it is written down, I don't know where. You would learn them by playing, and receiving lessons, and observing the commentary on badminton matches.
regarding commentators, what commentators are that technical? or what events(if any), have more technical commentary? e.g. listening to the commentators here on this video https://www(dot)youtube(dot)com/watch?v=3Dji2We0_Nk flicking around the video for examples I see they say things like "that's a fight for survival" They are silent during the rally and then if something was a bit long they might say "that looked a bit long". or if it was very long they might say "that looked very long". or "made a decision at the back of the court, cost him dear".. "he's upped his pace". It sounds rather like very casual untechnical often even like small talk.. If they did ever say anything technical it seems like it'd be very rare. I don't know if maybe i've got to look for particularly good technical commentators. But these ones don't seem technical at all.
Gill Clarke. Morten frost. Steen Pederson. Darren hall.Paul Erik Hoyer Larsen. Or course a lot of the commentary is just commentary, but if you find the right matches then you will hear the commentator mention the exceptional shot they hit. You pick up terminology over years of playing and listening, not by a technical breakdown of every shot by commentators in every match.
