China Masters should be scrapped and get replaced another country to host a SS

[volcom]

Why need skirt when most doubles legs so porky

[huangkwokhau]

Hahaha..Volcom...I can't answer that....

[fathonezic]

FYI, Liu Feng Yan, LYB's boss ( now Asia badminton representatives) actually asking BWF to reduce SS from 12 to 6 only...
Basically we wanted more tournaments for other players in different continents to participate and CHINA wanted less tournaments because they are thinking about their players may get injuries more often....
Now this will complicate the situation.....
BWF wanted to put higher prize money but Europe asking BWF to reduce so they can afford it...
Please note that Korea Open once offered US$ 1.2 million now US$ 1 Million....

omg.... quite complicated
yeah... this is the reality....

[chris-ccc]

FYI, Liu Feng Yan, LYB's boss (now Asia badminton representatives) actually asking BWF to reduce SS from 12 to 6 only...
Basically we wanted more tournaments for other players in different continents to participate and CHINA wanted less tournaments because they are thinking about their players may get injuries more often....
Now this will complicate the situation....
BWF wanted to put higher prize money but Europe asking BWF to reduce so they can afford it....
Please note that Korea Open once offered US$ 1.2 million now US$ 1 Million....

.
To reduce SS from 12 to 6 is a good idea, but we know that 5 of the SS are SSP. Therefore, BWF might as well reduce the SS tournaments to 5. Turn the other 7 SS to GPG.

IMHO, many players participate in tournaments to gain world ranking points. BWF need to make changes to their ranking points (being awarded in tournaments); Make BIGGER difference of points being awarded to tournaments (in the SS, GP, IC and IS).

My suggestion is for the ranking points to be awarded based on the ratio of tournament prize monies.

Note: Since the Thomas Cup, Uber Cup and Sudirman Cup are Teams Events (without prize monies), no ranking points shall be awarded to players of teams.
.

[Cheung]

FYI, Liu Feng Yan, LYB's boss ( now Asia badminton representatives) actually asking BWF to reduce SS from 12 to 6 only...
Basically we wanted more tournaments for other players in different continents to participate and CHINA wanted less tournaments because they are thinking about their players may get injuries more often....
Now this will complicate the situation.....
BWF wanted to put higher prize money but Europe asking BWF to reduce so they can afford it...
Please note that Korea Open once offered US$ 1.2 million now US$ 1 Million....

Definitely don't agree with the reduction in number of tournaments. It just means that China players (and managers) will have to pick and choose better which tournaments to enter. It also levels the field for all players. So if China players don't go to for example 3 SS tournaments, then those points will be shared amongst the other entries.

Having a variety of winners on the podium has to be a fair process and creates national interest. Imagine if Kevin Cordon won a SS title but without the strongest chinese players there. For himself, there's the motivation to continue on a personal level, he may attract more funding from his national body, interest in his own country definitely gets a boost - and it's all fair because there was no restriction on chinese players - it was because they chose not to send players to that particular tournament.

So I would definitely be against a reduction. If China want to protect their players from injury, then they have to either a) alter their training programme, or b) play in fewer tournaments.

[pcll99]

the way i see is simple. The higher the fewer.

For example, the most important individual event on the calendar is Olympics and WC. There is only 1 such event per year. The most important team event is TUC and Sudirman. There is only 1 such event per year.

The next important events are PSS and SS Finals. Currently there are six such events.

The next are SS event. There are seven such events.

GPG: there are 12

GP: there are 4

So there are 13 PSS/SS event and 16 GP/GPG event, a total of 29.

Without changing the number of total tournaments, i suggest that we change the calendar to the following instead:

PSS: 3
SS: 6
GPG: 9
GP: 11

wouldn't the above be more logical?

[Krisna]

FYI, Liu Feng Yan, LYB's boss ( now Asia badminton representatives) actually asking BWF to reduce SS from 12 to 6 only...
Basically we wanted more tournaments for other players in different continents to participate and CHINA wanted less tournaments because they are thinking about their players may get injuries more often....
Now this will complicate the situation.....
BWF wanted to put higher prize money but Europe asking BWF to reduce so they can afford it...
Please note that Korea Open once offered US$ 1.2 million now US$ 1 Million....

Uhm, We can have
5 PSS
10 SS
15 GPG
50 GP
......but there is no obligation for ALL the Chinese to go to ALL tournaments... Lin Dan can go to the 5 PSS, 5 SS and 1 WC/OG and the SS Finals...

It had been brought up a year or 2 yrs ago that Mens Single and Mens Double have their own tour...but since women players refuse to wear skirts,..many sponsors may not have WS and WD double...and also MIXED double is very popular after MS and MD..where does XD belong to? Mens or Womens tour??for sure...we may have more Mens tours than Womens tours.....
It is not easy and we still have a long way to go unfortunately....

Look at people criticise when company of Axiata offers US$ 1 million prize money....this shows that we are far away in term of thinking about this sport....

Badminton is similar to tennis, but not exactly like tennis... In tennis it is very boring to watch MD, WD, and XD... In badminton, all 5 categories are excellent!!!

Why would any idiot criticize a $ 1 million prize money?!? More money for the sport is excellent!!!

[Loh]

Whilst we hope for more tournaments and higher prize monies, surely there must be limitations to what can be achieved within just one calendar year without any decline in standards all round.

It has been said that to entice the right kind of sponsors to support the tournaments for an extended period is not so easy. Sponsors have their own objectives and timeframes. On the other hand, BWF and the local NBAs also have their own which may not coincide entirely with the sponsors. So some form of accommodation have to be tolerated.

To spearhead the popularity of badminton in new countries may need much more help and resources from BWF to be successful. Trained manpower, including not only the officials but also the backup staff, are also needed to ensure success.

Ideally professional players should be paid for participation at least to compensate them for expenses on food, lodging and travel, and this should be included in at least the SS and GP events.

Then there must be good attendance and media coverage, especially TV, to satisfy sponsors and fans. In this sense, although Macau can easily fork out the money but is unable to attract good attendance that makes it a bad choice.

So success can only be achieved when all these ingredients fall into place to popularize badminton. We can't just wave the magic wand to turn Africa or Latin America into an overnight success! Lots more have to be done to prepare for ultimate success.

So the allocation of the various BWF tournaments should be well-balanced to reward countries which truly deserve. And it is no point to increase the number of tournament without a concomitant increase in quality standards.

[sen]

I hardly watch tennis live so can't really comment whether doubles event are boring. To me, I find that even the single matches are boring.

As for badminton, I find WD boring because a lot of the pairs are winning through stamina(long rallies). If there is live TV broadcast, I sometimes watch or do other things when the WD doubles match start and watching only the last few points.

[tranqq]

Maybe bwf could set a limit to ranking tournaments towards OG qualifiers. eg// you're top 12 tournament results are used. That way players wont feel like they have to go to more tournaments than they need to, which should cut back on injuries.

[Krisna]

Definitely don't agree with the reduction in number of tournaments. It just means that China players (and managers) will have to pick and choose better which tournaments to enter. It also levels the field for all players. So if China players don't go to for example 3 SS tournaments, then those points will be shared amongst the other entries.

Having a variety of winners on the podium has to be a fair process and creates national interest. Imagine if Kevin Cordon won a SS title but without the strongest chinese players there. For himself, there's the motivation to continue on a personal level, he may attract more funding from his national body, interest in his own country definitely gets a boost - and it's all fair because there was no restriction on chinese players - it was because they chose not to send players to that particular tournament.

So I would definitely be against a reduction. If China want to protect their players from injury, then they have to either a) alter their training programme, or b) play in fewer tournaments.

I completely agree with you!!!! Nobody asked the Chinese players to play in all tournaments...

Maybe bwf could set a limit to ranking tournaments towards OG qualifiers. eg// you're top 12 tournament results are used. That way players wont feel like they have to go to more tournaments than they need to, which should cut back on injuries.

BWF have used the top 10 tournament results of each athlete.... So, for example, if Lin Dan is confident he can play in just 10 tournaments and got enough points to enter the Olympics, so be it. Nobody is stopping him......

[jamesd20]

if the BWF committee is majority asian and they try vote for more asian events, the this shows an inward looking attitude that will mean these other venues will never get a chance to host a big tournament.

With respect to less tournaments of course China want less. They will have a tighter grip on ranking and qualification manipulation. if there are more high ranking events they have less chance to do this unless they make the players play more tournaments. China prefer to play the tournaments they have to, go back and train for big events and just win them.

[tranqq]

I completely agree with you!!!! Nobody asked the Chinese players to play in all tournaments... BWF have used the top 10 tournament results of each athlete.... So, for example, if Lin Dan is confident he can play in just 10 tournaments and got enough points to enter the Olympics, so be it. Nobody is stopping him......

you're saying they already use that system? why is china worried about injuries then?

[Loh]

you're saying they already use that system? why is china worried about injuries then?

For those who are unable to score as many points or below their target to attain a certain goal, they are forced to play in more than 10 tournaments which may take a toll on their physical, like getting injured.

CJ is one example and he still had to play to gain more Olympic ranking points to get ahead of PG if he wants to be the third player after LD and CL to be the last CHN MS representative. CJ has got injured before and the worse thing to happen is for him to sustain another injury after he has qualified for LOG.

[Cheung]

I don't agree that smaller countries should not be able to hold a SS event.

Look at F1 - Monaco grand prix sticks out.

BTW Krisna, 5 PSS and 10 SS is absolutely fine. It also give more permutations when world ranking results are published. Quite possibly, that movement in rankings will give us fans more to talk about.

[pcll99]

.
To reduce SS from 12 to 6 is a good idea, but we know that 5 of the SS are SSP. Therefore, BWF might as well reduce the SS tournaments to 5. Turn the other 7 SS to GPG.

IMHO, many players participate in tournaments to gain world ranking points. BWF need to make changes to their ranking points (being awarded in tournaments); Make BIGGER difference of points being awarded to tournaments (in the SS, GP, IC and IS).

My suggestion is for the ranking points to be awarded based on the ratio of tournament prize monies.

Note: Since the Thomas Cup, Uber Cup and Sudirman Cup are Teams Events (without prize monies), no ranking points shall be awarded to players of teams.
.

you're right. the winners of Korea PSS gets 11,000 points and prize money is $1 million. The winner of a Malaysia Open GPG gets 7,000 points and the prize money is only $120,000. Something is very wrong with the WR points system.

[madbad]

you're right. the winners of Korea PSS gets 11,000 points and prize money is $1 million. The winner of a Malaysia Open GPG gets 7,000 points and the prize money is only $120,000. Something is very wrong with the WR points system.

If you follow the tennis (ATP) model (ATP1000, ATP 500, etc), the badminton version should be:
PSS = 10,000
SS = 5,000
GPG = 2,500
GP = 1,250
Int = 625

In this scenario, there is enough of a point spread to justify each level.