User Tag List

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 52 to 68 of 117
  1. #52
    Regular Member volcom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    3,532
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Why need skirt when most doubles legs so porky

  2. #53
    Regular Member huangkwokhau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    everywhere
    Posts
    18,440
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

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

  3. #54
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Kesultanan Ngayogyakarto Hadiningrat
    Posts
    3,095
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by huangkwokhau View Post
    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....

  4. #55
    Regular Member chris-ccc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    26,732
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Lightbulb BWF might as well reduce the SS tournaments to 5

    Quote Originally Posted by huangkwokhau View Post
    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.
    .
    Last edited by chris-ccc; 04-10-2012 at 04:44 AM.

  5. #56
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Outside the box
    Posts
    13,428
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by huangkwokhau View Post
    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.

  6. #57
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    came from the SAR
    Posts
    3,866
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    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?
    Last edited by pcll99; 04-10-2012 at 07:02 AM.

  7. #58
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Indonesia
    Posts
    5,893
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by huangkwokhau View Post
    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...

    Quote Originally Posted by huangkwokhau View Post
    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!!!

  8. #59
    Regular Member Loh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Singapore Also Can
    Posts
    11,903
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    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.
    Last edited by Loh; 04-10-2012 at 09:28 AM.

  9. #60
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Blue planet
    Posts
    1,395
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    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.

  10. #61
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    kelowna, BC
    Posts
    186
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    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.

  11. #62
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Indonesia
    Posts
    5,893
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheung View Post
    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...

    Quote Originally Posted by tranqq View Post
    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......

  12. #63
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    Leeds, UK
    Posts
    5,436
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    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.

  13. #64
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    kelowna, BC
    Posts
    186
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Krisna View Post
    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?

  14. #65
    Regular Member Loh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Singapore Also Can
    Posts
    11,903
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tranqq View Post
    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.

  15. #66
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Outside the box
    Posts
    13,428
    Mentioned
    34 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    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.

  16. #67
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    came from the SAR
    Posts
    3,866
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chris-ccc View Post
    .
    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.

  17. #68
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    coming to a court near you...
    Posts
    28,044
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pcll99 View Post
    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.

Page 4 of 7 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. LCW VS LD in China Masters SF
    By danielwong in forum China Masters / Japan Open 2009
    Replies: 261
    : 09-28-2009, 07:08 AM
  2. 2007 China Masters SS Pic's!!!!!
    By LI De Quan in forum Thailand Open 2007 / China Open (1) 2007 / Philippines Open 2007
    Replies: 117
    : 07-15-2007, 09:11 AM
  3. TBS-OSH to Rock in China Masters
    By X Ball in forum Thailand Open 2007 / China Open (1) 2007 / Philippines Open 2007
    Replies: 38
    : 07-15-2007, 04:43 AM
  4. Official China Website of the China Masters 07
    By ants in forum Thailand Open 2007 / China Open (1) 2007 / Philippines Open 2007
    Replies: 0
    : 06-22-2007, 01:49 PM
  5. China country code?
    By Kai91 in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 1
    : 12-11-2004, 09:52 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •