Thanks for visiting us!

Badminton Central is a free community for fans of badminton! If you find anything useful here please consider registering to see more content and get involved with our great community users, it takes less than 15 seconds! Everybody is welcome here.

Click here for a FREE account!

Should BWF change its present world ranking system?

Discussion in 'Rules / Tournament Regulation / Officiating' started by Loh, Sep 26, 2009.

  1. Loh

    Loh Regular Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2002
    Messages:
    14,792
    Likes Received:
    331
    Occupation:
    Stock Broker
    Location:
    Singapore Also Can
    Is Tiger better than LD as a professional?

    How much better in terms of skills, fitness, discipline and training time that Tiger, Michael Jordan and other highly paid sports professionals have over our top-notch badminton professionals? :rolleyes:

    When will badminton professionals be able to attain that sort of pay day that mostly US based sport people can attain? Does it mean that if badminton is unable to be marketed well and received support in the US, it is doomed to failure?

    What about sports personalities in other sports? NBA and EPL are thriving.
    Perhaps even Table-tennis gives out better incentives all round.
     
  2. ctjcad

    ctjcad Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    19,144
    Likes Received:
    4
    Location:
    u.s.a.
    Off topic-SS prize money..and future of badminton's popularity..

    - Badminton is a totally different sport than other pro sports, so it's hard to quantify if badminton athletes are better/not better in skills, fitness, discipline & training time to athletes like Tiger Woods, Air Jordan, Cristiano Ronaldo. Badminton is generally a finesse sport. The closest sport to baddy is tennis; but there are still quite a bit of differences between the 2.

    - I don't think U.S. based sports can be used exclusively to compare badminton with. You've got soccer/footie/football, tennis, golf and F1 racing over in Europe and S. America that are as popular as any other U.S. sports. But yes, the majority of the well paid/sponsored sports in the world have strong fan support bases in western countries. I don't think badminton is doomed for failure if it fails to enter western/U.S. markets. But most likely it'll stay relatively the same/stagnant with the way it is now.

    - Of course sports personalities in other larger sports are thriving. They're thriving simply because of the market and the size of their fan/team base.
    As for table-tennis' prize money or incentives, here's a link showing their prize-money distribution. I'd say they are comparable to badminton, maybe a bit more.
    http://www.ittf.com/_front_page/ittf1.asp?category=prize_money

    While you're at it, you can hover over to see what the table-tennis WR offers. Maybe that's another system to consider?
    http://www.ittfranking.com/
    ..i've attached a table below showing the prize money distribution @ the recent Li Ning Super Series tourney. And i would take it, they're roughly the same percentage amt. for every SS tourney. Btw, the total prize money was $250,000.
    So, for LD, he will get abt $18,7500 ($250,000 x 7.5%) if he becomes the champion. I'll let you guys do the calculation for the rest.
    Then if one wants to know how much would LD or LCW earn if they were to win 6 SS titles, then we can calculate $18,750 x 6 = $112,500. Of course, if they have to pay back some percentage to the national body, the total would be less. The likelihood for most of them to win 6 SS titles is slim & tough. And the only player who could possibly get that many is LD.
    Here is the link:
    http://09cbmcz.cba.org.cn/en/gl/2009-07-14/256930.html
     

    Attached Files:

    #42 ctjcad, Oct 2, 2009
    Last edited: Oct 2, 2009
  3. laivc

    laivc Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2009
    Messages:
    241
    Likes Received:
    8
    Occupation:
    Sales
    Location:
    Singapore
    Average the Points Based Numbers of Competitions

    A simple suggestion will be to average out the current points of each player by the number of competitions the players took part in. Based on this, the score from the current BWF World Ranking (2009-43) will look like this (interesting finding):

    Rank Players Ave Pts Total Pts Competition Curr BWF Rank
    1 Lin Dan 8743.07 69944.58 8 2
    2 Chen Jin 6056.36 66620.00 11 4
    3 Lee Chong Wei 5358.07 80371.06 15 1
    4 Sony Kuncoro 5261.37 47352.04 4 9
    5 Peter Gade 5202.71 67635.18 13 3
    6 Taufik Hidayat 5121.54 66580.00 13 5
    7 Park Sung Hwan 4613.89 55366.67 12 6
    8 Nguyen Tien Minh 3593.57 50310.00 14 7
    9 Boonsak Ponsana 3483.70 48771.75 14 8
    10 Wong Choong Hann 2438.95 46340.00 19 10
     
    #43 laivc, Oct 23, 2009
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2009
  4. Jonc108

    Jonc108 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,756
    Likes Received:
    10
    Location:
    Badmintonshire
    I had posted previously advising the same... maybe an improved version could be just average out their best 7-10 competition results...

    the current WR system is mainly based on "quantity" due to its point distribution not given the winners a significant recognition...
     
  5. t3tsubo

    t3tsubo Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2006
    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    0
    Occupation:
    Student
    Location:
    Edmonton AB, Canada
    I previous post on a different ranking for seeding and for "show" purposes seems like a good idea, similar to the one tennis has for grand slams. What about the following semi-radical change:
    Each major SS tournament's organizers can decide how to seed players based on 3 things: Their overall world ranking, their performance at this specific tournament in the previous year and the organizer's own discretion (for cases such as returning from injury, temporary retirement etc). It places a bit of trust in the tournament organizers yes, but it seems to be like the best way to go. Complaints (ie china team evenly distributing their players so as not to clash) can be made to the BWF, but beyond the 1st and second seed, the rest should all be randomly placed anyways (ie 3rd and 4th seed random between top or bottom half of the draw).

    What do you think?
     
  6. Jonc108

    Jonc108 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,756
    Likes Received:
    10
    Location:
    Badmintonshire
    an effort / achievemt respected system

    Regarding suggestions on improvement on the current ranking system, maybe we could try to look at the current ranking system from another perspective, take the SS ranking point distribution for example:

    (see attached Table 1)

    You could see that this is against common logic; the easiest game (Round 1 losers) would get the most points. The more difficult games you played (Round 2 to Finals, except the winner, who however didn’t earn as much as the Rd 1 losers), the fewer points you got…

    So a reasonable award to a win is that every win should guarantee same ranking points, if not more (which is also logical, as the further you progress, the more difficult games would be expected).

    (see attached Table 2)

    And then bonus points could be awarded if you beat a player with higher current ranking.

    this system is at least paying reasonable respect to players' achievements and efforts...
     

    Attached Files:

    #46 Jonc108, Nov 24, 2009
    Last edited: Nov 24, 2009
  7. Jonc108

    Jonc108 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2008
    Messages:
    1,756
    Likes Received:
    10
    Location:
    Badmintonshire
    alternative ranking point system - tables 1 & 2:
     

    Attached Files:

  8. skuo2003

    skuo2003 Regular Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2009
    Messages:
    38
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Durham, NC
    One thing to keep in mind when considering world rankings is that rankings isn't so much about who really is the best in the world right now--it is a reward system for past accomplishments. As in, because Lee Chong Wei HAS competed in so many tournaments and done reasonably well, he is ranked number 1. Thus, he gets the easiest draw (arguably) in tournaments by being seeded 1. The ranking system as it is now, provides incentive for players to actually go to tournaments, so if being world number 1 really means something to Lin Dan and the Chinese team, he needs to attend tournaments. As people have mentioned, it matters also for lesser ranked players so that players who have accomplished a certain amount and made it to the world's top 30 or so can enter Super Series tournaments without going through qualifying.

    I do NOT believe seeding in tournaments should at all be arbitrary (i.e. up to tournament organizers) because, again, seeding is a way to reward top players for their recent accomplishments, and the seeding order need not to correspond to perceived skill level. (If it did, how would one handle an up-and-rising star? It would only be fair for him to also work his way up the rankings by winning tournaments.) Factors such as results in same tournament in the previous year or injuries may be considered, but I believe there should be systematic way devised to take into those considerations.

    (For the record, tennis only has different seeding orders at Wimbledon, in which they consider previous GRASS COURT performance, and not any any of the other three majors.)
     

Share This Page