Results 35 to 51 of 97
Thread: Pause in the serve
12-12-2005, 04:48 AM #35Originally Posted by merlin
12-12-2005, 05:41 AM #36
well i think i understand your point.
however, it still won't solve my problem
we in the badminton club come to the gym for badminton practice, to have fun
well just because he and his partner kept losing to us for the past several weeks is what probably cause him to do this (finding ppl's 'mistakes')
and i come to practice wouldn't want to have an argument with him everytime as are all of you don't you think
so i would follow what he wants, a k a serve forehand in doubles game..
so, anybody has a suggestion to give me on how to handle this guy?
for me, it's not a big deal coz i play single too but the other players have been complaining to me too regarding this and i don't know what to tell them..
12-12-2005, 05:53 AM #37Originally Posted by It'sMeMeMe
if they can't - then ask them what they are complaining about.
IF you are making a fault, then it is better to understand exactly what the fault is and how it is a fault so that you can correct it.
Hope this helps
12-12-2005, 06:30 AM #38Originally Posted by rtp12
The movement of the server's racket must flow continually after the start of the service unit the service is delivered without any pause. You can vary the speed of service slow-fast/ fast-slow BUT cannot pause. Any pause movement is consider illegal.
12-12-2005, 08:31 AM #39
Below your elbow? Do you mean where your elbows would be when your arms are hanging by your sides? Otherwise it doesn't seem to make sense
12-12-2005, 08:35 AM #40Originally Posted by dpc1l
i quite like the elbow one because its more visible than the lowest point of the ribcage..
12-12-2005, 08:44 AM #41
Sorry, it's just that a guy I played recently insisted that his serve was legal because it was below his elbow, but he was hitting it just below shoulder height.
I couldn't figure out where he had got that information, but now it makes sense. It's really easy to see where the waist is!
12-12-2005, 08:50 AM #42Originally Posted by dpc1l
It is only an interpretation, though. The law talks only about the waist, which is normally agreed to be below the level of the bottom rib, and the elbow is, strictly speaking, irrelevant. Elbow height and bottom rib do not always coincide.
12-12-2005, 08:54 AM #43Originally Posted by CWB001
in my opinion the elbow is a good guideline, and if a player wishes to argue with me i will insist they lift their shirt so i can see where the lowest point of their ribcage is..
12-12-2005, 09:04 AM #44Originally Posted by coops241180
12-12-2005, 09:08 AM #45Originally Posted by twobeer
if the player were beautiful you could insist they took the shirt off so you could see the ribs all the time
12-12-2005, 10:30 AM #46Originally Posted by It'sMeMeMe
If you examine the logic of your statement, you can see how absurd it is. By the same logic, he can fault you for anything whatsoever. For example:
Him: "What did you have for lunch today?"
Him: "Sorry, but that's against the laws of badminton. It's a fault; we win the rally."
You: "That's not a fault! I'm allowed to eat noodles!"
Him: "It's not in the laws. Show me the law that allows you to eat noodles!"
You: "I guess you're right. Your point."
Him: "By the way, I ate chicken for lunch so we get an extra five points"
12-12-2005, 10:55 AM #47Originally Posted by coops241180
Anyway, I find using elbow as measurement is a big issue because player who use backhand serve often lift their arms up and forward. By the way, I think IBF measure the player before match and put a visible tape on the shirt to indicate the legal serve. Just a joke....
12-12-2005, 11:33 AM #48Originally Posted by silentheart
the elbow measurement is taken when the elbows are by the players sides - not when raised up. usually the service judge will watch a player while knocking up or some other time before the match begins in order to get an idea in their mind where the imaginary line for service should be.
12-12-2005, 03:15 PM #49
I was making a theoretical statement, to demonstrate:
not-B therefore not-A
instead of an actual statement. Gollum's illustration was more amusing though.
Originally Posted by CWB001
12-12-2005, 03:55 PM #50
LOGIC 101 - how abstract
Originally Posted by wood_22_chuck
12-12-2005, 04:12 PM #51Originally Posted by j_e_thompson
By - иεvvεи٭т -ツ in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / OfficiatingReplies: 3: 12-20-2011, 10:43 PM
By JustinG in forum Techniques / TrainingReplies: 9: 07-28-2010, 08:32 PM
By Pureskillz76 in forum Techniques / TrainingReplies: 27: 05-01-2009, 10:46 AM
By pyaarawala in forum Techniques / TrainingReplies: 69: 01-15-2009, 12:09 AM
By Framerate in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / OfficiatingReplies: 22: 02-26-2003, 03:28 AM