User Tag List

Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LastLast
Results 86 to 102 of 152
  1. #86
    Regular Member craigandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    1,554
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gollum View Post
    There's a difference between "doesn't work amazingly" and "works godawfully".

    When deciding upon rules, some consideration should be given to amateur play. A system that only works well for 1 in 10,000 players is a poor system.

    I suppose there's nothing to prevent them using different rules depending on the officiation available (i.e. club rules don't change, pro rules do).
    Your right there is a difference i suppose and in an ideal world, but they need to call it somehow and I don't see how they can find an accurate system for the pro's that will also be workable accurately in the club play environment.
    Do you think the current service calling system even though not accurate for pro's shows more consideration to club than the proposed system? Have you got a solution that would be more usable for club and also accurate for the pro level?

    Unfortunately in this case i think the proposed system can only be classed as poor if there is a better solution, not on how many benefit from it.

  2. #87
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    London area, UK
    Posts
    3,879
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by craigandy View Post
    Do you think the current service calling system even though not accurate for pro's shows more consideration to club than the proposed system?
    Yes. I think it's more practical for club play than the proposed system. And I also think it is sufficiently accurate for the pros too -- although the proposed system would likely be more accurate.

    Then again, I have no experience of the proposed system, so I don't want to dismiss it out of hand. The service laws have always been the most awkward part of the rules, so it's good that the BWF is trying to make them work better.


    Have you got a solution that would be more usable for club and also accurate for the pro level?
    No. But I don't see why they must use exactly the same rules. If the proposed rule turns out to be impractical at club play, I would like to see the rules acknowledge this by defining different service laws depending on the available officiation.

  3. #88
    Regular Member craigandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    1,554
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Gollum View Post
    Yes. I think it's more practical for club play than the proposed system. And I also think it is sufficiently accurate for the pros too -- although the proposed system would likely be more accurate.

    Then again, I have no experience of the proposed system, so I don't want to dismiss it out of hand. The service laws have always been the most awkward part of the rules, so it's good that the BWF is trying to make them work better.




    No. But I don't see why they must use exactly the same rules. If the proposed rule turns out to be impractical at club play, I would like to see the rules acknowledge this by defining different service laws depending on the available officiation.
    Interesting. Well if you read back in the thread you will see from 5'7 through to 6'2 are still serving from about their lowest rib and only an inch or so between them. I can't see how imaginary lower rib can be better for ruling at club play given we are talking maybe inches diff for new rule. Too small diff to notice, you are more worried looking for sign of a flick coming.

    How many service faults were actually given at your club/ league last year? for mine zero and their was a lot, so I can inform you the current/old system does not work at all at club level from what I have experienced. That's 2 different leagues and 3 clubs.

    Imo I don't think service is a major problem/advantage in the amateur game and if it is, a quiet word should be enough so he/she does not repeat the following week. If that does not work then the guy/girl is just sad. I can see why the pro's push it given there is money involved/ getting an edge and stuff. It needs to be more accurate at pro level.
    Last edited by craigandy; 05-03-2013 at 07:23 AM.

  4. #89
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    London area, UK
    Posts
    3,879
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by craigandy View Post
    How many service faults were actually given at your club/ league last year?
    I rarely see anyone else call service faults, but I do. I also encourage other players to call service faults; bad serving can ruin the game.

    I'm not playing matches at the moment (injury), but I have often called bad serves in match play. I usually offer a let to sweeten it, as a fault seems harsh given the lack of an objective judge. Nevertheless this usually stops people playing ridiculous drive serves; and often they lose confidence in their serve, which effectively gives me some free points.

    I also call serves in club play, but there are circumstances where I let it slide. Some players genuinely struggle to change their serve, even if they accept it's a fault. When you've been serving the same way for 30 years, it's hard to change.

    I find that service faults are rare at higher-standard clubs (although this could vary between clubs). So at a "serious" clubnight, I almost never feel the need to call a serve.

    My other context is coaching. I feel responsible for warning players if they are making service faults; I also feel I should encourage fair play, especially among juniors. If the proposed rules go through, I'll need to bring a measuring stick to coaching sessions...

    I can never quite take off my coaching hat; so even in a "social" club setting, I may try to educate players. I try to stop short of being an unwanted know-it-all. Sometimes I succeed.

    In all these contexts, I still dislike calling service faults because of the possibility I am wrong. With the current system I add a small "margin" to ensure that my call is correct. With the proposed system, I would not feel justified making the call at all, having no visible point of reference.

  5. Likes BBEdrummerAK liked this post
  6. #90
    Regular Member craigandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    1,554
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Fair enough, for coaching you could bring a piece of string in and tie it the length of the net at the appropriate height for player reference, maybe something similar for player umpired matches could be used at clubs too. This obviously would not be suitable at pro level but they will have a judge.

  7. #91
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    145
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Regarding enforceability of this rule, its not hard to just get a tape measure and find out where 110cm is relative to somebody's body when they are in their normal service position, just do it once at the start of the game. Then enforcing the new rule is equivalently difficult to enforcing the old rule, i.e. the reference point is somewhere on the person's body. People's service position wont change much, and the odd cm here or there is well within the error limits.

    If you are going to go around with special equipment, then clearly the new rule is easier to enforce since its a fixed height from the ground.

    I wonder if in amateur play something similar has always been in effect. Normally nobody bothers to say anything about service height/rules unless you are getting a big advantage from drive serving. Thus if a short person served a bit high nobody really cares, but if a tall person served a bit high and was getting an advantage people would complain. Maybe the tall person was maginally legal under the old rules, but now it will definitely be illegal, and thats a good thing!

    From my point of view short serves are ok, flick serves stop rushers/overcommittment and are ok, but driveserves have always seemed a bit unfair, especially since only certain lucky tall people can do them, so you can't "do it back to them". So now driveserves are less effective, all will be well!

  8. #92
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    55
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NanoBatien View Post
    Regarding enforceability of this rule, its not hard to just get a tape measure and find out where 110cm is relative to somebody's body when they are in their normal service position, just do it once at the start of the game. Then enforcing the new rule is equivalently difficult to enforcing the old rule, i.e. the reference point is somewhere on the person's body
    i haven't really been reading this thread, but can't you just use a laser to draw a horizontal line at 110cm (like a laser level used in construction). the service judge can turn it off after the service.

    the server would see the correct height and hopefully there would be less faults
    Last edited by randomuser; 08-15-2013 at 04:44 AM.

  9. #93
    Regular Member craigandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    1,554
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by randomuser View Post
    i haven't really been reading this thread, but can't you just use a laser to draw a horizontal line at 110cm (like a laser level used in construction). the service judge can turn it off after the service.

    the server would see the correct height and hopefully there would be less faults
    You should have We have discussed this but everybody serves from a different point in the court take mixed doubles for instance guy serves a long way from where lady does, you would have to blanket the whole first 1/3 of the court in laser.

  10. #94
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    NorCal, United States
    Posts
    807
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I believe last I heard, they were testing possibly a string through the net, but I don't think that will work, because like craigandy said, it's hard to see behind the female sometimes in mixed. As a service judge, you would have to keep adjusting your chair just to see the serve. I call mixed a back breaker when I service judge it since you have to move around and lean to the side and what not.

  11. #95
    Regular Member craigandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    1,554
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CantSmashThis View Post
    I believe last I heard, they were testing possibly a string through the net, but I don't think that will work, because like craigandy said, it's hard to see behind the female sometimes in mixed. As a service judge, you would have to keep adjusting your chair just to see the serve. I call mixed a back breaker when I service judge it since you have to move around and lean to the side and what not.
    A string through the net? How could that be a useful tool to the service judge? would their positioning be moved to behind the court?

  12. #96
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    NorCal, United States
    Posts
    807
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You would be moved closer to the court instead of that isolated lonely seat in the corner they usually get, and then just lean to the side and look with using the string. How will it work for mixed, is something they would need to figure out though.

  13. #97
    Regular Member craigandy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    1,554
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CantSmashThis View Post
    You would be moved closer to the court instead of that isolated lonely seat in the corner they usually get, and then just lean to the side and look with using the string. How will it work for mixed, is something they would need to figure out though.
    Seat in the corner? I have always seen the service judge directly across from the umpire in the middle side directly in line with the net posts. To lean over to look through the net and see some body serving is impossible, you would have to lean right over and stick your head on the court. What am I missing here?
    Last edited by craigandy; 08-18-2013 at 12:07 PM.

  14. #98
    Regular Member V1lau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    West Coast
    Posts
    366
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    What about getting rid of the below the waist rule all together and just have the following rules: the bird must travel in an obvious upward trajectory and the racket must be obviously pointed in a downward direction.

    It seems to me the below waist service rule is impossible to enforce with any kind of consistency and people on the club level are already serving just under their chest anyways.

  15. #99
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,632
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    19 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    yeah because 'obvious(ly)' is not at all subjective and impossible to enforce

  16. Likes craigandy liked this post
  17. #100
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    312
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by V1lau View Post
    What about getting rid of the below the waist rule all together and just have the following rules: the bird must travel in an obvious upward trajectory and the racket must be obviously pointed in a downward direction.

    It seems to me the below waist service rule is impossible to enforce with any kind of consistency and people on the club level are already serving just under their chest anyways.
    because one can easily make it a drive and hit it at head height?

  18. #101
    Regular Member V1lau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    West Coast
    Posts
    366
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by amleto View Post
    yeah because 'obvious(ly)' is not at all subjective and impossible to enforce
    The word "obvious" in this context means it's the responsibility of the player to demonstrate that the server's actions are closer to the rules and not straddling the lines of the legality like we currently have.

    For example: you would have to serve below the top of the net to achieve an upward trajectory and if the flight is close to level or level, than that would be a fault. So the word obvious would force you to serve somewhere at the middle of the net level to keep within the rules. Which I think is better than trying to determine the last rib of someone's body.

  19. #102
    Regular Member V1lau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    West Coast
    Posts
    366
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blableblibloblu View Post
    because one can easily make it a drive and hit it at head height?
    I already deal with that kind of serve already in club matches. The racket having to be in a obvious downward angle should help with this as the only people I know who do this serve, serve with the racket sideways. I think it is much harder to do effectively with the racket pointed down, but i don't serve like that so I maybe wrong about that.

    I don't know how the serves would look like without the waist rule in place, but it feels like some players already serve like their isn't a waist rule now, I think it will takes away the constraint on the people who at the moment serve properly and the advantage of those who don't serve properly.

Page 6 of 9 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 LastLast

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
  •