User Tag List

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 35 to 51 of 52
  1. #35
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Medicine Hat, AB, Canada
    Posts
    208
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OTFK
    How would a server block the "sight" of the shuttle from the receiver?
    May be this can be a possible loophole that we can explore.
    Anyone got any ideas that a server can take advantage of this and confuse the receiver?

  2. #36
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Medicine Hat, AB, Canada
    Posts
    208
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Neil Nicholls
    I can't think of much else, but I've even heard people say that covering the shuttle with the hand is illegal.
    IMO, the server's hand covering the shuttle is not an effective method. Something more drastic is needed to confuse the receiver's attention.

    I think we should explore this and see whether there is a loophole that a server can take an advantage here.

  3. #37
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Medicine Hat, AB, Canada
    Posts
    208
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by S4MadMan
    LOL Frank! I need to work on my serve, I eat the serve many times a day.
    Does that mean a helmet is needed?
    If the opponent jumps my serve, sometimes I will need my partner to do a flat drive right back to the service receiver to catch him/her off guard.

  4. #38
    Regular Member DinkAlot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    dcbadminton.net
    Posts
    12,203
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by OTFK
    Does that mean a helmet is needed?
    Nope helmet is needed, at least not now.

    Actually, I got lucky (*keeps fingers crossed and knocks on wood)*, with the help of SCChang, I really improved my serve just over the weekend. SC said I stood too far back and it was making me inconsistent with my serve, as well as making it hard to get to return drop shots. SC suggested I stand right up at the service line and for some reason, my serves are getting over low and no helmet is now required.

  5. #39
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Medicine Hat, AB, Canada
    Posts
    208
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by S4MadMan
    Nope helmet is needed, at least not now.

    Actually, I got lucky (*keeps fingers crossed and knocks on wood)*, with the help of SCChang, I really improved my serve just over the weekend. SC said I stood too far back and it was making me inconsistent with my serve, as well as making it hard to get to return drop shots. SC suggested I stand right up at the service line and for some reason, my serves are getting over low and no helmet is now required.
    Good for you. Just watch out some guys will time your serve and jump on it so racquet up and drive right back to them.

  6. #40
    Regular Member DinkAlot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    dcbadminton.net
    Posts
    12,203
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OTFK
    Good for you. Just watch out some guys will time your serve and jump on it so racquet up and drive right back to them.
    That's where the flick serve comes into play.

  7. #41
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Canada, Mississauga
    Posts
    433
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by TrunkZ69
    I remember hearing in a dvd about a new law (From 04 i think) that its okay for your foot to go under the net now. I believe it was gade vs LD AE 04 final where i heard it.

    as for lunging at teh serve, you can always do it after they hit the bird ;P
    does anyone know when the start of the serve is? I believe it is when the forward motion begins, not at the contact point.
    Yes your feet may go under the net. I should have made that clear as part of the misconception. it is commonly thought that your feet cannot cross the net. However, it may cross as long as doing so does not distract the receiver in a way that they were affected in performing the shot.

  8. #42
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    746
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OTFK
    Sorry, I should have quoted the rule.
    As Neil Nicholls points out Rule 9.7 is the one that I am referring to. The receiver should be able to see the shuttle. This rule is "more important" in doubles as the partner can block the view on the shuttle completely.

    Yes, currently Rule 9.1.4 states the base of the cork mus be the first contact point in the serve. However, back in the 1970s (if I recalled correctly), there was no mention about the base of the cork to be the first point of contact. That was how the Chinese explored the loophole.
    Thanks, but this rule (9.7) makes no mention of shuttle, just server and receiver! So the block of the shuttle view is not illegal.

  9. #43
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cambridge, UK
    Posts
    1,543
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jump_smash
    Thanks, but this rule (9.7) makes no mention of shuttle, just server and receiver! So the block of the shuttle view is not illegal.
    ah thanks for pointing that out...

  10. #44
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Medicine Hat, AB, Canada
    Posts
    208
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jump_smash
    Thanks, but this rule (9.7) makes no mention of shuttle, just server and receiver! So the block of the shuttle view is not illegal.
    9. SERVICE
    9.7 In doubles, the partners may take up any positions which do not unsight the opposing server or receiver.

    The main point of interest on the service in doubles is able to see the shuttle at the serve.
    OK, so how would you propose a legal service in doubles with the partner blocking the "view" of the shuttle? Remember the shuttle cannot touch the partner's body, clothes or racquet and still go over the net. I can only think of high serve to go over my partner's head.
    I do not think in doubles serving high all the time is a wise move.

    If "unsight the opposing server or receiver", then most of the female players in XD will be violating this rule. As most of the female players is at the front during service but she will likely block the "sight" of her male partner or parts of his body from the receiver sight line.

  11. #45
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    746
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OTFK
    9. SERVICE
    9.7 In doubles, the partners may take up any positions which do not unsight the opposing server or receiver.

    The main point of interest on the service in doubles is able to see the shuttle at the serve.
    OK, so how would you propose a legal service in doubles with the partner blocking the "view" of the shuttle? Remember the shuttle cannot touch the partner's body, clothes or racquet and still go over the net. I can only think of high serve to go over my partner's head.
    I do not think in doubles serving high all the time is a wise move.

    If "unsight the opposing server or receiver", then most of the female players in XD will be violating this rule. As most of the female players is at the front during service but she will likely block the "sight" of her male partner or parts of his body from the receiver sight line.
    Thanks, but I didn't mention partner blocking the view of shuttle only mentioned server blocking view of shuttle, which under the current rules is not mentioned!

    As to second paragraph, it is dowm to defonition of unsight opposing server or reciever, as most female players do not totaly block the view of the reciever, and as to your point in previous paragraph if they did this then the server would only be able to execute a high serve over their heads.

  12. #46
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Medicine Hat, AB, Canada
    Posts
    208
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    [QUOTE=jump_smash]Thanks, but I didn't mention partner blocking the view of shuttle only mentioned server blocking view of shuttle, which under the current rules is not mentioned!
    [QUOTE]
    "Server blocking view of shuttle" - I think this is easier to say it than actually doing it. I have a hard time to visualize how this can be done effectively (as in a previous reply to Neil Nicholls).

    How would you propose the server to block the view of the shuttle and still perform a legal and effective serve?

  13. #47
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    746
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    [QUOTE=OTFK]
    Quote Originally Posted by jump_smash
    Thanks, but I didn't mention partner blocking the view of shuttle only mentioned server blocking view of shuttle, which under the current rules is not mentioned!
    "Server blocking view of shuttle" - I think this is easier to say it than actually doing it. I have a hard time to visualize how this can be done effectively (as in a previous reply to Neil Nicholls).

    How would you propose the server to block the view of the shuttle and still perform a legal and effective serve?

    Frank, thanks.

    See one of my previous posts,
    Quote Originally Posted by jump_smash
    My old friend and coach used to do a serve with he body angled so her shoulder was obscuring her hand and contact point of shuttle!
    , http://www.badmintonforum.com/vb/sho...3&postcount=20

  14. #48
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Santa Ana, California
    Posts
    35
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I remember that it was the Malaysian men's doubles players (not Chinese) who used to serve by brushing the feather, making the shuttle so wobbly that even if you can return the serve it would go in wild directions. I think it was the Sidek brothers. As I remember IBF changed the rule on that one very quickly, within a couple of years.



    Quote Originally Posted by OTFK
    Sorry, I should have quoted the rule.
    As Neil Nicholls points out Rule 9.7 is the one that I am referring to. The receiver should be able to see the shuttle. This rule is "more important" in doubles as the partner can block the view on the shuttle completely.

    Yes, currently Rule 9.1.4 states the base of the cork mus be the first contact point in the serve. However, back in the 1970s (if I recalled correctly), there was no mention about the base of the cork to be the first point of contact. That was how the Chinese explored the loophole.

  15. #49
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Santa Ana, California
    Posts
    35
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    While the "shuttle below the waist" is definitely in IBF rules, if you see the doubles matches at the WC05, so many players were hitting the serve above the waist that I thought that maybe they've changed the rules. For example, look at the Danish men's doubles (the pair that Tony/Howard beat in the qf) or Lilyana Natsir -- they practically hit the shuttle chest-high, but with the racket head always below the hand.

    I would like to have a definitive agreement on this. Is the "shuttle below the waist" rule still in effect????

    Quote Originally Posted by Gollum
    Nope. Rule 9.1.6.

    There are two main rules about serving here - shuttle below waist, and racket head below hand. Read the laws!

  16. #50
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    746
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rudytjip
    While the "shuttle below the waist" is definitely in IBF rules, if you see the doubles matches at the WC05, so many players were hitting the serve above the waist that I thought that maybe they've changed the rules. For example, look at the Danish men's doubles (the pair that Tony/Howard beat in the qf) or Lilyana Natsir -- they practically hit the shuttle chest-high, but with the racket head always below the hand.

    I would like to have a definitive agreement on this. Is the "shuttle below the waist" rule still in effect????
    Ruling is correct, interpretation is that waist is lowest rib bone.

  17. #51
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Korea
    Posts
    2,402
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OTFK
    The start of the service
    Rule 9.4 Once the players have taken their positions, the first forward movement of the serverís racket head shall be the start of the service.
    In case anyone is wondering:
    Rule 9.5 Once started (Law 9.4), the service is delivered when the shuttle is hit by the serverís racket or, in ...
    I have had many people complain when I do an abrupt backswing in advance of the serve. I place the racquet head in front of me, then the shuttle in front of that. Then I jerk the racquet head back toward my body, pause, and then begin the forward motion. Many players expect an immediate forward motion so when it doesn't come, they complain that I have had two movements. I thought that only the forward movement needed to be continuous and that a separate backswing was okay. Nothing in the rules contradicts this. Even a coach from Kim Dong-moon's professional team accused me of this (which is ironic since I'm convinced one of his top players breaks rule 9.7 on almost every serve) when I did this against him. The only thing I can think of is that jerking a racquet head back may produce a tiny bit of instability when the backward motion is stopped but I don't think my opponents are keen enough to detect this. When people are miffed at having been caught off-guard, it isn't uncommon to conclude that there must have been something wrong with it.

    The other weird thing about where I'm from is that no one ever calls a net touch violation unless the tape is touched. When an arm or hip contacts the mesh, no one says "boo". I think I've seen glancing contact with mesh go uncalled in an international match, too, but I can't remember where. In local club games, though, I've seen entire torsos go crashing into the mesh (the bottoms are never tied off) and no opponent even considers calling a fault whereas contact with the tape is always called with vigilance.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. String Tension Misconceptions?
    By Loafers in forum Badminton String
    Replies: 6
    : 11-20-2008, 09:51 PM
  2. Common Misconceptions In Terms of Equipment
    By XtC-604 in forum Racket Recommendation / Comparison
    Replies: 19
    : 07-26-2008, 11:45 AM
  3. Misconceptions of Beginners
    By bighook in forum Techniques / Training
    Replies: 59
    : 12-23-2006, 11:15 PM
  4. Misconceptions about static balance point
    By taneepak in forum Badminton Rackets / Equipment
    Replies: 50
    : 03-07-2006, 10:19 AM
  5. Misconceptions of Beginners
    By bighook in forum General Forum
    Replies: 12
    : 11-08-2004, 01:39 PM

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
  •