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
12-15-2005, 04:41 AM #120
Yeah !!...Yeah !!...Yeah !!...
Originally Posted by DinkAlot
12-15-2005, 11:51 AM #121Originally Posted by taneepak
This decision was unilaterally imposed by IBF.
12-15-2005, 11:55 AM #122
To be precise, the position of BFers is currently 215 against and 35 in favour of the new scoring system => 86% against
I think the petition shouldn't be "on behalf of www.badmintoncentral.com" but more widely open to all badminton fans in the world.
A petition website would maybe be a good idea.
12-15-2005, 09:41 PM #123Originally Posted by seven
The number 215 will not even appear if you consider the number of badminton players in the world.
12-15-2005, 09:53 PM #124
The old scoring system actually does not have a finite end to a set despite its supposedly 15 points. In theory a set can go on for days. A 15 points set could chalk up 500 rallies. Under the new system a 21 point set (max 30) actually means what it says. You can see and appreciate that the winner actually wins 21 points or from 22 to 30 points. You are not confused by a score of 15-0 under the old system when the winner won 515 rallies and the loser wins 500 rallies.
Sometimes things do look different from different angles.
12-15-2005, 10:13 PM #125Originally Posted by event
How bought the 13% make thier own damn petition... i'm really scared,
I was using this POLL as a reference only - its called a concensus people! ..... since players from alot of different countries participate in this forum we can conclude to some degree atleast people are not happy with the posiblities of this ruling. My conservative guess for this is that 70% of people are Not going to like this change.... I made that guess before I even saw this post... as soon as I heard about it at a local tournament, I was pleased to see the number in this post being over 80 percent; if only in this post.
For me its a matter of Gut feeling, I know this rule change is Idiotic and I know the vast majority of players anywhere are going to feel the same way.
Many people are saying its worth a try, its not - there are far more reasonable ways to improve badminton and suite the needs of TV sponsors or whoever.
12-15-2005, 10:18 PM #126
taneepak, the good still doesn't outway the bad with 21x3 ..not by a longshot. Tennis has had problems for years gaining popularity for the TV audience... and still isn't huge, but they sure as hell aren't going to sell out to make the game times consistent. (which they are not) one might find that statistically badminton game-times are not really less consistent than any other successful tv sports, perhaps even more consistent. worth looking at?
To be honest I think this whole problem about Time is BS.... let me show some examples:
here are games I've dowloaded off the net that went 2 games (of 3)
wc2003.md.sf.paaske,.rasmussen.v.sang,.zheng.avi Complete Match 40 Mins
Badminton.-.2003.WC.XD.Semi.ChenQQ.ZhaoTT-KimDM.RaKM.mpg Complete Match 55 Mins
Badminton.-.2003.WC.MD.Quarter.ChanCM.ChewCE-SangY.ZhengB.mpg Complete Match 40 Mins
Badminton-2003-WC-MD-QF-Paaske_Rasmussen-Panvisvas_Teerawiwatana_g12.avi Complete 43 Mins
wc2003.ws.f.zhang.v.gong.avi Complete Match 53 Mins
Badminton-2003-WC-XD-Final-Kim_Ra-Zhang_Gao.avi Complete Match 56 Mins
Badminton.-.2004.AE.MS.Semi.Gade-Hidayat.mpg Complete Match 49 Mins
Badminton-2003-WC-MS-SF-XiaXZ-BaoCL-g12.avi Complete Match 49 Mins
Badminton - 2003 Wc Ms Quarter Shonsm-Chenh.mpg Complete Match 49 Mins
I don't see any drastically huge difference in times of these games.... with games that go 3 sets ... they're isn't a huge difference between those either.
21x3 is simply not worth it for what your giving up.
Last edited by wedgewenis; 12-15-2005 at 10:31 PM.
12-15-2005, 10:50 PM #127
Let the new system have its trial period. Don't be the judge, jury, and executioner before the poor "fellow" is brought to trial.
12-16-2005, 12:44 AM #128Originally Posted by taneepak
12-16-2005, 01:42 AM #129Originally Posted by taneepak
I'm not saying either system is easier, more logical, simpler, etc than the other. In fact, that's my point (i.e., that, IMHO, neither system is). It's just a matter of getting used to it. I'm sure had we grown up with rally scoring, we wouldn't have been happy if IBF's switching to a service-based system.
I think the real debate is whether these rule changes as a whole will make badminton a more popular *spectator* sport. And I personally doubt it. Not in North America and specifically in the US, anyway. Simply because there's no history of it here. (Yes, I know about the great Ms. Judy Hashman and her domination in the 1950s. But, even then it wasn't a popular sport in the US.) IOW, it's not ingrained in people's minds. It's got other "problems," but I think most people here simply don't know what it is. If IBF wants to promote the sport, IMHO, they should do just that. Have top players go on tour to promote the sport. Play exhibition matches. Have an exhibition day at major tournaments. Look at MLB, NBA, NFL, MLS with their all-star this and that, home-run derby, slam-dunk contest, etc. Absolutely silly and pointless spectacles, but great for fans and non-fans alike. And excellent for attracting the young ones to the sport. If people become interested, they'll learn the rules of the game. Whatever they are. Very few sports have more complicated, vague, little known twists than baseball and (American) football. But, yet, there're a lot of people watching and playing them. Why? Because they're interested. I highly doubt that by simply changing a few rules would make people to suddenly be interested in badminton. That's like saying, "I've always liked to watch and learn to play badminton, but the rules were simply too complicated. But, now that they've changed it, I will."
12-16-2005, 02:25 AM #130
makes sense to me. hope they dont change it
12-16-2005, 02:32 AM #131
Well, the real test is yet to come. If there is no change in the belief that "if things ain't broke, why fix it?", we can never really know if our future generations will be better off or be fossilized by us. What "ain't broke" to one can be a death sentence to another. To find out, well, you need to find out.... Finding out means doing something and see if it is better, worse, or if it could open up other opportunities and new ways of looking at the problem. Where is the spirit of inquiry and inquisitiveness?
12-16-2005, 03:18 AM #132Originally Posted by taneepak
This is a vast majority of above 86% of the replies.
Obviously, neither of us can decide for the millions of badminton fans/players around the world who HAVEN'T replied to this poll.
12-16-2005, 03:21 AM #133Originally Posted by taneepak
I think the new scoring system is MORE DIFFICULT to understand, especially the part about who serves to who in doubles. It is NOT simple and logical.
12-16-2005, 03:25 AM #134
Taneepak, there is "mathematical" evidence that the new scoring 1/makes games shorter 2/makes come-backs impossible 3/decreases the suspense at end of games.
Overall, less interest for spectators like us and major change to the game itself with a lot less stamina and mental strength required (more power on the other hand).
12-16-2005, 03:29 AM #135Originally Posted by seven
All this talk of fossilised badminton is nonsense. There are some things in life that are self-evident. One of those is that worseminton will not attract new or bigger TV audiences.
12-16-2005, 04:07 AM #136Originally Posted by seven
By maximR in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / OfficiatingReplies: 5: 01-20-2011, 05:36 PM
By kwun in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / OfficiatingReplies: 513: 03-01-2009, 09:49 PM
By MikeJ in forum Jonas Rasmussen ForumReplies: 21: 06-05-2006, 07:03 AM
By wong in forum General ForumReplies: 7: 04-26-2006, 11:34 PM
By cheongsa in forum Singapore Open 2005 / Malaysia Open 2005Replies: 1: 06-29-2005, 08:01 AM