Past vs Present...

**Bbn** · 07-12-2003, 10:59 PM

Good eg. of unorthodox strokes- Xie Xin Fang.

Good eg. of 80's player with uneconomical style,

Xiong Guo Bao with his double actions and deceptive play

in 1986 T Cup. Later changed to a more efficient style (maybe with better racquets)

that we know today.

Will Xie Xin Fang and Mia Audina go the way of Xiong ?

***kwun*** · 07-13-2003, 02:23 PM

interesting to see the style of players and their coaching influence.

Lee HI - Li Mao
WongCH - (initially) Han Jian
and then the whole squad of Chinese MS players.

and i think of another description for them, rigidity in style but efficient and effective.

and then other pointed out those who do not fall into this category, Taufik, Gopi, Gade, etc, all have non-chinese coaches.

interesting that Bbn brought up Xie. i have been trying to study her style. i'd say her style is unorthodox but also very efficient. mainly finger and wrist action with minimal footwork. yet shots are as effective. similarly for Maria. older generation players have their unorthodox style too, Zhao with his behind the head drop, YY with his no body rotation jumpsmash.

perhaps the elite during the older generation has more varying style. while the elite in the current generation has less?

**Bbn** · 07-13-2003, 08:04 PM

I think the biggest trend setter in today's badminton is Tang Xian Hu.

80's starss played to Hou Jia Jiang's style.

Tang Xian Hu created a fast pace style first in Ina in the form of

Indonesian players in 90's and recently people like Xia, Bao, Chen Hong

etc. Li mao created people like Sun Jun, Dong Jiong etc but I have seen Li Mao play,

he is sth like Xiong Guo Bao but his strength is in match strategy, not style.

I think today's game was set up by Tang to beat older players like Poul Erik Hoyer in

his hey-days.Just a guess.

**Bbn** · 07-13-2003, 08:50 PM

I guess again that Li Yong Bo and Tang's strategy is to produce fast, efficeing, fit

and consisitent players who can survive early rounds of tournaments tournament

after tournament to maintain their seedings. If it happens that their opponents in

the final stages are not outstanding, then they win titles.

I think that's why some players do well in GP tours but flop in matches in

Thomas Cup or Sudirman, because in these team matches, being brilliant could

mean more than consistency in one-off matches.

YY and Zhao never had to play so many tours and they were never highly ranked as

they chose their tournaments, unlike Frost, who must be the most consistent.

i think 80's players could afford to be brilliant but there is a downside, players like

Zhao, Dong Jiong, Poul Erik play brilliantly one day and flop next as their playing

style is high risk and prone to a lot of errors.

i guess badminto is as commerlised today as pop music, is Mariah Carey better than

say Diana Ross ?

**michaelavich** · 12-17-2005, 01:32 PM

This summer john macenroe blow away mark philipoussis in singles! (World Team Tennis)

"Similarly in tennis people fail to appreciate the brilliance of Sampras and talk about the skill of McEnroe etc, there just isn't the time nowadays to play the more graceful game and players now are packed with muscle , meaning their movement, although faster, isn't as graceful."

**taneepak** · 12-17-2005, 10:25 PM

I am old enough to have seen players from the late 1950s period of Tan Joe Hock, Ferry Sonneville, Teh Kew San to Rudy Hartono, Earland Kops, Han Jian, Zhao, Yang Yang, Frost, Misbun, through all the current crop of players. It is not fair to compare them with today's players. Given the very limited funds, much poorer equipment and the lack of real peer competition, the past masters never had the opportunity to reach the very high levels they were capable of. If you take off the "if they had today's facilities" I really don't think the past masters would be able to match today's masters. That would include great ones like Hartono or even the great Master Tang.
The new scoring system may make the game even faster This may require new strategies. As Eddy Choong once said, the game of badminton is evolving and alive, never stagnant.

**s1nn3r** · 12-18-2005, 10:43 PM

Originally Posted by taneepak

Given the very limited funds, much poorer equipment and the lack of real peer competition, the past masters never had the opportunity to reach the very high levels they were capable of. If you take off the "if they had today's facilities" I really don't think the past masters would be able to match today's masters. That would include great ones like Hartono or even the great Master Tang.

This is very true, the past master may lost badly to current player but people then to forget their biggest contribution to badminton is

new playing style, past player has to do a lot of thinking themself as there are not that many good coaches around & different country got different approach to the game
perfecting every stroke, by trail and error past player find the best way to make a shot and past it on to the next generation.
finding the best training progamme, training progamme is still being fine tune by using the scientific approach.
making badminton more famous, if not for them, we will not be playing badminton now & maybe just in the backyard

cheers...

**Eurasian =--(O)** · 12-20-2005, 07:02 PM

People in general get better at everything with time. In the case of badminton new rackets, shots, deception, nutrition, tactics, shoes, court surfaces will improve todays players. It is not human nature to get worse at anything. Computers from the 80s are no where near the computers of today. Same with badminton rackets, same with training facilities, training regimines. If you take all the players old and new and put them through the same training, same food, same equipment...... how can anyone possibly hope to compare that?

**taneepak** · 12-21-2005, 02:15 AM

This may be telling. Today's top players like Lin Dan probably hits the shuttle more in one month of training than Earland Kops or Tan Joe Hock did in 6 or more months. You just look at their arms.

**viver** · 12-22-2005, 01:03 AM

Lin Dan could probably hit the shuttle more in one month of training than Earland Kops, but don't think he hits more than the old timers like Tang Xinfu, Hou Jiachang and co. As for the 'old timers', they did not have much TV or internet to distract them.

And often for their singles games/drills, they played against 2 opponents...

**s1nn3r** · 12-23-2005, 10:00 AM

Originally Posted by viver

Lin Dan could probably hit the shuttle more in one month of training than Earland Kops, but don't think he hits more than the old timers like Tang Xinfu, Hou Jiachang and co. As for the 'old timers', they did not have much TV or internet to distract them.

And often for their singles games/drills, they played against 2 opponents...

But they also dun have yonex and other to sponsor them. Shuttle cock, restring & court rental = $$$$$

**viver** · 12-23-2005, 11:33 PM

Originally Posted by s1nn3r

But they also dun have yonex and other to sponsor them. Shuttle cock, restring & court rental = $$$$$

For the Chinese players, they have the country sponsoring them. Everything is provided free, aren't you aware of that? I believe in many powerhouses, their players are treated more or less the same way.

**s1nn3r** · 12-24-2005, 12:31 AM

Originally Posted by viver

For the Chinese players, they have the country sponsoring them. Everything is provided free, aren't you aware of that? I believe in many powerhouses, their players are treated more or less the same way.

But back in Tang's era they even have problem financially to compete outside their country. Most of the time when they play outside, is when some one from other country or chinese living abroad sponsor them.

**viver** · 12-24-2005, 02:03 AM

Originally Posted by s1nn3r

But back in Tang's era they even have problem financially to compete outside their country. Most of the time when they play outside, is when some one from other country or chinese living abroad sponsor them.

I don't know where you got this information, as far as badminton in China, it was always country supported. They seldom play outside China is not due to financial problems but rather political.

**GameGod** · 11-06-2009, 11:36 AM

I find it unlikely that Lin Dan would be able to keep up with the godly Zhao Jian Hua (if the latter was on form) or Yang Yang; aside from that, keeping everything constant, today's players would probably emerge the victors.

**dlp** · 11-06-2009, 04:08 PM

YY and Zhao, while being my heroes would not be in the top 50 today with their 1980s style and fitness

**cooler** · 11-06-2009, 05:47 PM

Originally Posted by GameGod

I find it unlikely that Lin Dan would be able to keep up with the godly Zhao Jian Hua (if the latter was on form) or Yang Yang; aside from that, keeping everything constant, today's players would probably emerge the victors.

no 2 player is alike.
ZJH is more deceptive and more stroke variety.
LD is faster and has more power. In his current state, his stroke and deception ain't bad either.

I'd say LD would able to take ZJH just because LD can able to launch attack sooner. Deceptive and stroke is not as effective when you're always 1/2 to 1 step behind your opponent. Just look at TH vs LD in 09 FO, first set, LD ran circles around TH, the stroke and deception magician. On the 2nd second, TH resorted to just smashing (ie power) which give him a few more points than b4.