# Thread: Reasons why Lin Dan is #1 (21/08/05)

1. Originally Posted by Raphael
clearly LD is not better than TH.
I tend to agree with that, but is TH no.1 then ? NO. As I mentioned in previous post badminton is not math. TH is better than LD but is not better than other players where LD is better than them. It's no point arguing on that. A beats B and B beats C but C beats A, end of story.

Originally Posted by Raphael
Perhaps they should have much more weighting for big tournaments.
I think they did. The points the players collect are based on how big the tournament is, ie. 6 stars tournament will gain more points than 5 stars. Having said that, that's the best ranking system that one could think of and that's the best way to determine who is no.1.

2. Originally Posted by virusvoodoo
Well this used to be true until recently after Hidayat got his game back. I am not so sure Gade can hold his ground against Hidayat anymore. I mean Hidayat annihilate Gade in the second set of the Surdiman cup.
Wheter it used to be true or not or its still true it doesn't matter. I'm just taking peter gade to put in between them as an example. My point is, no particular player could beat ALL of the other players to stand as the BEST. Badminton is no math.

3. currently the winner of a 7* gets 6000points, 6* 5400, 5* 4800, 4* 4200, 3*3600, 2* 2000, 1* 2400

600 point gap between stars. also remember that the 1* to 6* are decided on the prize money avaliable and only loosely related to prestige while the 7* are obviously very big titles.

also going out at the semi final of a 7* gets you the same points as winning a 4*. going out at the quarterfinals at a 7* gets less than a 3* tournament win. i think the current system is fine and quite well balanced. since there are only limited 7* tournaments, the differences between the 3*-6* points are not too spread out. notice it is also a linear relationship, and not exponential since there is no need to make it exponential. make it too exponential and no one in the top 10-20 will be going to 3* events anymore. and since the 1*-6* system is linear, there is no need to make the 7* points increase exponentially.

4. [QUOTE]
Originally Posted by Wildstone
I tend to agree with that, but is TH no.1 then ? NO. As I mentioned in previous post badminton is not math. TH is better than LD but is not better than other players where LD is better than them. It's no point arguing on that. A beats B and B beats C but C beats A, end of story.
No one is saying badminton is math. Discussion is on (once again) "Reason why Lin Dan is #1". There are two ways of interpretation from that statement: First, Lin Dan is better than anyone else -or based on what you said- most consistent so that is why he is #1. But sadly he is consistent only when he plays smaller tournaments. Anyone dare to say he is consistent in playing big tournaments? Second, he is #1 by accumulating as many points as possible by winning smaller tournaments and this is a FACT. What I was arguing is whether or not he is a worthy #1. Judging by the number of responses here, that LD is #1 is totally DISPUTED because he has no high calibre credentials (such as winning the olympic, world championship or the likes) to back his ranking. If he was an UNDISPUTED #1, there wouldn't even be necessary to have this thread and all these discussions. And FYI, there are UNDISPUTED #1s in other sports like Roger Federer in tennis, Brazil in soccer, Valentino Rossi in MotoGP etc.
As for TH being #1, he is not #1 at present but he was #1 in the past.
But is LD an olympic champion or world champion, present or past? Answer is NO.

I think they did. The points the players collect are based on how big the tournament is, ie. 6 stars tournament will gain more points than 5 stars. Having said that, that's the best ranking system that one could think of and that's the best way to determine who is no.1.
I am also fully aware of the current ranking system with the different amount of points for different tier tournaments. If you read carefully I said "They should put MUCH more weighting..." meaning that I am not totally happy with the current weighting. It doesn't not necessarily have to be exponential (the point difference between different tiers) because that would be too much, increase the gradient of the linear curve slightly or make it a parabolic curve with positive coefficient should do it. Please don't take offence with my math...

5. The reason why Lin Dan is ranked number one is because he got more ranking points than anyone else.

Lin Dan is currently the world ranked #1 player. Taufik is currently the world and Olympic title-holder. And that is that.

6. Originally Posted by hcyong
The reason why Lin Dan is ranked number one is because he got more ranking points than anyone else.

Lin Dan is currently the world ranked #1 player. Taufik is currently the world and Olympic title-holder. And that is that.
WinnAR! Lin Dan is the #1 Ranked Player based on the IBF point system; while Taufik is...you guy and gals know the rest.

7. for me, Taufik Hidayat is the best in MS. His ranking low because of he didn't participate many tournaments. Lin Dan only can be the champion without the particapation of Taufik. That makes Lin Dan at the top ranking.
Taufik still the best ....

8. Not sure how this forum works, but other forums I'm been in (non-badminton ones), this topic would have been locked. Everyone has their opinions and everyone is entitled to them, but lots of post are surely off topic by miles!

9. Originally Posted by Oinkers
Not sure how this forum works, but other forums I'm been in (non-badminton ones), this topic would have been locked. Everyone has their opinions and everyone is entitled to them, but lots of post are surely off topic by miles!
The more diverse the opinions the more tolerant we become. Locking at the drop of a hat somewhat locks your mind, don't you agree.

10. Originally Posted by taneepak
The more diverse the opinions the more tolerant we become. Locking at the drop of a hat somewhat locks your mind, don't you agree.
Hahaha.. but diverse opinions? All I've read is "TH is better than LD" - not diverse at all. The only way I can find that it links to the topic is "if only TH played more matches, he would be number 1"

"Locking at the drop of a hat somewhat locks your mind" - totally agree. But when it has become overly 'repetitive', it somewhat bores people, so you sorta want to lock your mind.

11. Originally Posted by Oinkers
Hahaha.. but diverse opinions? All I've read is "TH is better than LD" - not diverse at all. The only way I can find that it links to the topic is "if only TH played more matches, he would be number 1"

"Locking at the drop of a hat somewhat locks your mind" - totally agree. But when it has become overly 'repetitive', it somewhat bores people, so you sorta want to lock your mind.
well maybe you shouldn't read these kinds of threads too much.....its just people giving their opinions on reasons why LD is number one, one reason bein that taufik doesn't play as many tournaments otherwise he would be number 1.

Page 4 of 4 First 1 2 3 4

#### Posting Permissions

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