View Poll Results: Which scoring system do you prefer?
- 721. You may not vote on this poll
Old 15x3 service based scoring
New 21x3 rally based scoring
12-10-2005, 12:13 AM #103Originally Posted by seven
12-10-2005, 11:12 AM #104
OMG!!! how can a traditional scoring format just change like that?
12-13-2005, 08:36 AM #105
since we have all these discussions revolving around IBF, new scoring system, popularity, etc etc. Does BF/BC has any influence in IBF? Any of the members work for IBF/have "a say" in the decision making?
IF we sign a petition/online petition to IBF to keep badminton just as it is right now, will it work? will they even consider it? I'm pretty sure some one could organize an online petition or even a real one to keep badminton as it is.
This may help since the new scoring system will be on trial for a litle while. If some one make this online petition. sticky the thread so we can sign on it.
12-13-2005, 06:46 PM #106
I think the proposed new scoring system deserves a chance. Let it be tested out. Neither you nor anyone are 100% certain that it will be detrimental to the game. The new system has a point in allowing a point to be awarded for a rally won irrespective who the server is. After all it doesn't really make sense that you cannot even get a point for a rally won but merely the right to serve when your opponent is serving, under the current system. Let us have an open mind. The game of badminton is evolving. It is not cast in stone. IBF officials at least have the guts to opt for change which they think is for the better. What is wrong with that?
If our poll shows we are against the proposed new system and if the new system turns out to be a real hit, then we would look foolish, wouldn't we? Maybe that is why we are what we are and the IBF officials are what they are, the former mere back-seat drivers and the latter selected because they are movers and shakers.
12-13-2005, 08:44 PM #107
Doubles Service - Even Right, Odd LeftOriginally Posted by kwunOriginally Posted by bluejeff
The doubles serving ritual defined in IBF Laws in practical sense is:
There is only one service per side.
When the score is EVEN, the serve is from the RIGHT service court.
When the score is ODD, serve is from the LEFT service court.
You reckon, there is the fellow in the high chair to ask questions. It is your right to ask, and the ump's duty to clarify to you.
The legalese given below for reference only.
In any game, the right to serve shall pass consecutively:
11.4.1 from the initial server who started the game from the right service court11.4.2 to the partner of the initial receiver. The service shall be delivered from the left service court.11.4.3 to the player of the initial serving side standing in the service court corresponding to that side’s score. (Law 11.1)11.4.4 to the player of the initial receiving side standing in the service court corresponding to that side’s score (Law 11.1) and so on.
Hope this helps. Thanks for trying the rally points objectively!
Last edited by 2wheels04; 12-13-2005 at 08:55 PM. Reason: typo
12-13-2005, 09:02 PM #108
My view is that this is a rediculous attempt by the IBF for all the reasons stated... most of these reasons havn't been addressed by anyone who's voting in favour of the change...this passive 'oh lets wait and see' attitude concerns me too.
Canada is NOT adopting this system ... i hope to god they have sense to keep it that way.
rallypoint is the stupidest thing the ibf has come up with yet
Originally Posted by Double_Player
I say bring on the petitions - FIGHT THE POWER !
Last edited by wedgewenis; 12-13-2005 at 09:08 PM.
12-13-2005, 10:24 PM #109
Sorry to double post ... not sure how that happend:
Just a draft. I havn't checked spelling
tell me if i'm missing anything,
Originally Posted by wedgewenis
12-14-2005, 05:24 AM #110Originally Posted by wedgewenis
12-14-2005, 05:41 AM #111Originally Posted by taneepak
12-14-2005, 06:15 AM #112Originally Posted by taneepakOriginally Posted by taneepakOriginally Posted by taneepak
12-14-2005, 06:58 AM #113
I'm french and new at Badmintoncentral but I will give you the experience I saw in France. France National Team has experience this system with the Deutch National Team and for what I see is that all the game has a maximum time of 40mn for 3 sets.
Each set duration is above 10~15 minutes.
And the other point is that this system are really benefit for player who has less stamina (maybe Peter Gade can win Lin Dan with it).
Some player has told that this system is really disturbing and does not push the player to take risky shot now that even if you serve your are not in security.
I think effectively for what I saw that this system deserve badminton. Has many people say, we like the physical challenge in badminton and with this system this is lost!
12-14-2005, 06:59 AM #114
I am with event and wedgewenis on this one.
Those who don't want to sign the petition don't have to do it.
Once we have the definitive petition, I can translate it into french as I think many french players/fans are ready to sign it too.
12-14-2005, 08:42 PM #115
The forum has more than 11,000 members. Wouldn't it be more proper that at least 50% of the members are in agreement re the petition before we can claim in the petition that we are representing the BF? If you must petition then I think it is fairer if you were to state in the petition that we are XX number of players/members out of a total of 11,000 plus players/members, instead of claiming that you are petitioning on behalf of the BF.
12-14-2005, 09:32 PM #116Originally Posted by taneepak
12-14-2005, 10:47 PM #117Originally Posted by event
Please bring back the old scoring.
12-15-2005, 12:03 AM #118
Have you ever considered that the new scoring system could have been the collective proposal from the major national badminton associations? Without their input or blessing do you think the new system would even get off the ground? National badminton associations are more representative of their country's views and opinions than any of us. Are we punching above our weight? Personal opinions, yes, but to punch way above our weight, no.
12-15-2005, 02:44 AM #119Originally Posted by taneepak
Just where do you get this idea about the representativeness of national associations? Members of national badminton associations do not stand for elections on platforms relating to point systems, etc. Nor are they delegated from local groups of players to represent collective views at the national level. They may make guesses about their compatriots' wishes but they are not elected representatives. Did anyone from the Hong Kong association contact you and ask you for your views before giving this notional okay to the IBF? Did they contact anyone you know? KBA didn't contact me. There is no poll on their website in the aftermath of the trial of the new system at the nationals. This forum is as good a place as any to gauge rank-and-file player/fans' opinions on a new system. Our opinions count. We are the ones who play and watch the matches. We theoretically buy the products that are advertised during commercial breaks. If a forum like this of 11,000 members is the only one that has come up with a way to poll constituents, then it needs to be used.
Having said all that, the voices of people who have no experience with a new system are not very persuasive. On the other hand, we don't have that much less experience than the people at the IBF. They made a decision without knowing what the resultant matches would look like. We have a right to oppose that decision without knowing what the resultant matches will look like. People who make decisions based on money only reverse those decisions when the money doesn't flow in. Since we are consumers, maybe our dissatisfaction means something. Or since so many of us are addicts and will watch anyway no matter how lame they make it in the name of attracting TV contract offers, maybe our squawking will be ignored. I mean the whole point of getting it on TV is to attract audiences who aren't currently watching badminton...
By maximR in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / OfficiatingReplies: 5: 01-20-2011, 04:36 PM
By kwun in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / OfficiatingReplies: 513: 03-01-2009, 08:49 PM
By MikeJ in forum Jonas Rasmussen ForumReplies: 21: 06-05-2006, 06:03 AM
By wong in forum General ForumReplies: 7: 04-26-2006, 10:34 PM
By cheongsa in forum Singapore Open 2005 / Malaysia Open 2005Replies: 1: 06-29-2005, 07:01 AM