What happens to flick serves in pros games these days? Almost every time someone uses it, a service fault is called. Does it mean - 1. BWF doesn't want players to use flick serves? 2. Most players need better flick serves practice? 3. They're already at borderline with their low serves that have much less movement. In other not to tip off a flick serves, they must keep their preparation and height the same for serves that involve bigger movements? And how can the service judge spot that so clearly when the service actions seem so fast... .
Isn't it a case of definitions? You can look at it this way. Previously, anything clearly a fault gets called a fault - therefore, anything marginal gets let through. Now, every serve must be clearly legal - thus, anything marginal gets called a fault. It's harder to hit a flickserve if the shaft is more horizontal.
this happened too in the 1 year qualifying period before the 2012 olympic games... i think it's just bwf making sure the players are aware they can't get away with illegal serves
The case is because they serve above their waist most of the time. another case is because usually the racket is so close to the shuttle at serve (dunno why, they should have more space between the racket and shuttle, so they can serve low and flick without difficulty, maybe the reason is for accuracy as a little movement of tap is enough for low serves) so players tend to bring the shuttle up to make space for a bigger hit which eventually lead to hitting above the waist
This is a healthy move by the officials. I for one did not enjoy seeing players complaining their opponents' questionable serve. First question comes in mind is whether they complain to influence the officials. But more often than not, the replays show players serving above their waist, some even at chest level. Gill and Steen both think that the players are pushing the limit too far. I agree with them.
Flick serves used in pressure situations often result in advantages for the server, but used too frequently and they returner usually takes advantage. Many flick serves are called for a foul, because players are usually on the limit of the rules with their low serves, and with the flick serve there is a tendency to raise the shuttle during the hitting action. However, do you need to break the rules to hit a good flick serve? No. I'd argue that hitting with a horizontal shaft is just as easy as hitting the a shaft facing upwards, or downwards (but not vertically downwards - which is tough). In my view, the players are lazy - they develop a serve which is barely legal, and then complain about it. There is no need for them to start so high in the first place OR to raise their racket/shuttle during the hitting process. Its just not necessary.
Question is - where exactly is the waist-line? Badminton rule book defines it in such a way that it's not easy to find, even for low serves.
Flick serve is a very useful tactical weapon. With all these faults called, this could become useless. From the players perspective, I'm wondering why it seems nothing is done to avoid/minimize fault call. Perhaps they don't want to change their service actions that could tip off their opponents.
Service judges use the player's elbow tip as a measure of the lowest rib (which also happens to be the level of the belly button). If there're any patterns or markings on the clothing, they can be matched against the elbow, and the service judge will use those markings against the shuttle during serve.
But what cause such a shift in the threshold/margin? I talked to one recently retired Doubles professional (Chinese National team). He mentioned as a matter of fact that flick serves would usually be called fault, but didn't offer a reason (and I missed the chance to ask)... Why does it have to be this way?
It doesn't HAVE to be this way. My serve would never be considered a fault, because I purposefully have a serve action that is very low, obviously legal, not even worth considering if it is high. The two reasons a flick serve will be called a fault are: 1. height - this is because almost all players push the boundary on low serves, and inadvertently raise the shuttle when they flick. They could avoid this by serving from an "obviously" legal position - but this is harder to do. And most of the time players will get away with it, so they never "learn" to serve from a lower position. 2. racket direction - most players raise their racket (pivoting about the hand) as they hit shuttles upwards, so that the shaft starts to point upwards. Obviously on serve this is a fault, but the rest of the time its fine. This is a technique thing - its perfectly easy to hit a flick serve without any kind of follow through and hence not violate this rule, but if you do it every day in training, and its marginal, then it will not be corrected by the coaches. I guess what I am saying is that they have two options: 1. completely remodel their serves so they never experience faults (difficult) 2. rely on the fact that most of the time their serves are legal, they CAN actually do it legally (so don't NEED to relearn), its just sometimes they are a bit careless (try to be careful) - this is considerably easier. If it were me as coach, I would insist that players had an excellent serve that was well within the rules and pushing no boundaries - it would be more difficult to learn, but would never lose points to faults.
and it is copied by everyone, I would like to argue with my partner and opponents as many serve near their neck everytime, particularly the good players. But it is very much something ingrained into them for a long time so they just can't change easily and when I argue it would lead to a pointless debate. There is also this forehand serve that is at head level.
If you watch LYD/YYS's first MD match against Malaysia, you'll see that LYD was faulted about 7-8 times for serving above the waist, VERY far above the waist. The problem is that when he's about to serve, his left hand actually starts to lift the shuttle. And as you can see, it ends up around his chest and obviously gets faulted for this. 7 more times. Each time with more annoyance and frustration with the service judge. As much as I like LYD, he's incredibly stubborn and I believe this is what ultimately lost him the match against the Malaysians. Props to the service judge for having the guts to continually fault the high profile players so they cannot get away with this.
Kenichi Hayakawa the latest "victim" of the service judge in the match against FHF/ZN. Faulted about 6 times throughout the match for serving too high. Not quite as bad as LYD's service height, but still quite high enough to get faulted. He even called the tournament referee, and of course had no luck. Again, I applaud the service judges for standing their ground in the face of coaches and top players. I applaud the BWF for standing behind their judges and to push forward this new change. Of course that doesn't go for all judges/umpires (mistakes on keeping score....See XD match between INA and Denmark)
