Which type of doubles do you play?

hi facial

i play the first choice on doubles it's the one i perfer.

 

in B,

it sounds like the players are going into a defensive formation right after a serve. This doesn't make sense since a serve is an attack. You would only do this if you were serving high and expecting a smash--but why would you intentionally give them a chance to smash?

If you are servering short, the server is already in the front near the centre, so it only makes sense for that person to get the front net shots while the other stays in the back, aka the offensive position. This allows the server kill easy net shots while the backend player to smash higher end shots. I see no reason to leave this formation unless you are defending against a smash.

 

with me it depends on my partner, if he/she is skilled in badminton positioning......ie...take the net when i smash, and vice versa, saides when we lob then i play 1. if they are not used to rotation (1), then we just play "sides" and i usually try and cover more.....cos if they cant stand in the right places, then they're not likely to be all that strong.

ttktom-cos that way u get to smash the lifts which are too short?

 

If I undertand rightly what you mean... then A) is correct, B) is not!!!

 

for the reasons, read bigredlemon's answer, seems like a good answer to me!

 

That someone must suck big time. I mean sure, you can do this, but I wouldn't bet on consistent winning results against quality players if you go defensive following a serve.

 

Looks like "B" takes the doubles court and turns it into two thin singles courts.

A player serving a low serve in this style would have to stand farther back than with "A" because he/she would have to get to the back if the receiver returns the serve with any kind of a clear.

I've played with partners who use this style. They usually serve real high like a singles serve, but, of course, it can't be as deep.

 

IMHO, it depends on the quality of your own game and that of your partners.

Type A emphasizes on the fact that the person at the back attacking can smash or drop the shuttle steep enough not to invite a power drive into the face of the person in front.

I play a lot of type A when my partner knows how to keep the attacking pressure on the opponents so that I can prey on weak returns or net shots with a quick chop. The problem with this is that if my partner becomes too adventurous or doesn't smash properly (becomes drive instead of smash), I'd be the one to receive the reply, often straight in the face.

Heck, I broke my glasses after being smashed TWICE at the place on the same game against the same opponent because my partner was toying with drops that got the opponent to kill when I am in front.

I generally try to keep attacking by getting the shuttle to go downwards ala how the pros does it on the tv to make sure that the guy in front doesn't get into trouble.

I go into Type B if I am not too sure if the guy at the back can keep the attacking pressure, just to make sure I (or him/her) don't get hammered.

I stand corrected.

 

Yups... A is the correct one. As if aft u serve, u move back. ur opponent net, U n ur partner will haf to lift, not that gd to play defensive.

 

if that guy want to go in after his smash he can. i do that sometimes, but our partner has to know to drop back to take any clears. its rotation.....the pro's do it very nicely, esp from mid court smashes where the front guy sort of goes to one side to let the rear guy smash it, and the smasher follows in, cos it would be pointless for him to go back again, and the previous fron guy drops back to cover.

 

type A for me

 

I would prefer type A.. most of the pro generally use type A formation. But serving is also an important factor to it. the general rule in doubles is to make your opponent to lift the ball as much as possible.

 

Type A! But a lot of club players here, play type B, especially older players
who want to play defensive, find it comfortable, or just don't know any better.

 

Re: Thanks...

I still don't see how it's logical. Maybe against a weak opponent, but not against a top tier one.

First of all, I assume the server would like to be near the net so already, this already dictates a certain formation.

Next, assuming that both of the players on the serving team are preparing to receive either a drop or clear, this would mean that both have to be somewhere in the middle of the receiving area. This also means that both have to be capable of smashing back a clear while, most likely, backpedalling.

The only thing I see his style of returning doing is minimizing his team's vulnerability to shots that attack them laterally. But lateral attacking is not really the brunt of the doubles game, you stretch an opponent more when you force them to defend net and baseline.

That's where the majority of opportunities come about. When your opponents rushes back to clear a telling shot to the baseline and because of the fact he's not very well set, the return is weak and provides an easy smash chance. Or if you make him scramble to get to net and he doesn't make a clean return.

I still maintain that his strategy leaves him vulnerable. If receiving his serve, i do a cross court clear, his partner better make a damn good return because a shot cross court short is coming next. If his clear is compromised in any way because of the fact that he also had to guard cross court drop on the return of serve, easy smash is the result.