User Tag List

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 35 to 51 of 81
  1. #35
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by CWB001
    Are you a member of the IBF or do you just gullible enough to swallow everything they say?
    No, I just want to give everyone a fair trial. Don't you?

  2. #36
    Regular Member ants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Malaysian Citizen of the World
    Posts
    13,157
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Sometimes views expressed are just not enough. Maybe someone can do something about it?

  3. #37
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    746
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I agree, happend before with 5x7, will probably happen again.

    As I have said previously it is not about making changes... it is about properly promoting the sport!

    Quote Originally Posted by badrad
    i think in the long run, players will play the way they are most comfortable. over time, the small group of pencil pushers at the IBF will be off the council, and a new group will be cleaning up the mess this current group made. unfortunately, as history tends to perpetually repeat itself, this will likely happen again in another few years, with new group of over-zealous desk-jockeys, and we will have the same old discussions once again.

    in the meantime, nothing has changed. there will not be a mass of new players flooding into the sport. there will be no budweiser sponsorship, or a super-bowl hype of any badminton event in North America...

    it will simply be a few forgotten little people who tried making a change... a change that few people wanted... what a waste of time and manpower...

  4. #38
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Canberra, Australia
    Posts
    746
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Thanks, don't you think we have already dicussed this, put forward our view points? Some people are just yes people!

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    For Australians they have an even more powerful council member, a vice president, Robin Bryant. Why not use him as a lightning rod? Talk the talk, and walk the walk. Have the guts to do it the right way. But, try to build up your case on a more solid foundation. Shooting the idea down before it is even tested will only weaken your case, because it will be treated as a "spoilt" vote. If you are a national association member, a top national player, a national coach, a national or international accredited umpire you should know how to go about this.

  5. #39
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Canada, Mississauga
    Posts
    433
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    We're basically repeating the same thing over and over again so i didnt bother reading after page one so if we moved onto a new topic, forgive me.

    Since it is evident that this new scoring system is not very popular in both the professional world and the amateur world, i think that IBF will change it back eventually.

    I amcurrently trying to persuade my friends that badminton is challenging to both the mental and physical body but this new scoring system makes it like a wussier version of volleyball and brings it down to the standards of table tennis. Personally I am not a strong player and I generally become more offensive during my serve because I have nothing to loose. However, with this new scoring system, I feel intimidated to be offensive during the game in fear of a frame shot.

    My main point is this. Badminton is already the second most popular sport in the world before this system. The badminton tournaments gain enough support as is to keep the sport favourable. Why change the fundamental rules of the game in order to make it even more friendly to the world?

  6. #40
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DinkAlot
    LMAO!
    hey, wait up and smell the ........ (and it isn't the coffee )

  7. #41
    Regular Member DinkAlot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    dcbadminton.net
    Posts
    12,238
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cooler
    hey, wait up and smell the ........ (and it isn't the coffee )
    Wait up? LOL! You're the one that needs some coffee Cooler.

  8. #42
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Perth, Australia
    Posts
    2,784
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by manduki
    Why change the fundamental rules of the game in order to make it even more friendly to the world?
    I don't know, prolly the IBF wants to show the world how it the game can be shat on with the new shaky game rules the retarded and idiotic people at the IBF can think of.

  9. #43
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    182
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default fret not, things that can not survive will die.

    Quote Originally Posted by ccskaki
    Try having a look at the latest article on their official website:

    http://www.intbadfed.org/Portal/desk...10&ItemID=1903

    The last paragraph reads:
    " The event has received positive feedback from many people and although there are some quarters who have expressed alternative opinions, it seems that the overall consensus is that many have welcomed the new scoring system. Umpire Tomoharu Sano of Japan said: "The game is now very fast and the officials have to be very alert too at all times. It's an exciting change." "

    Wow, so according to this IBF article, the new scoring format was welcomed by most people (overall consensus). But why can't they find a positive comment from the top players or coaches who are the people most qualified to give a professional opinion? Why can't they find a positive comment from the spectators who are the ones really concerned about the entertainment value of matches. No they have to get a comment from an UMPIRE!

    The reason is because the truth is that most players didn't like the new scoring system. Just read your newspapers (not written by IBF).

    IBF must be desperate. Someone must have some personal agenda behind all this.
    well, i almost totally agree with what ccskaki feels. and i'll add some more here.

    Taufik clearly expressed that he doesn't like the new scoring system at all. so did many other pros.

    chinese national coach Li Yongbo made a very negative comment on the new scoring system (in chinese), he is that kind of guy who always means what he says and says what he means.

    so much for responses from the pro line.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    (after i finished what i felt like to write, i found it toooooo long, so i cut it into fragments, here you go)

  10. #44
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    182
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    as for us, WHO CARES? ANYONE OF YOU ARE PLAYING THE NEW SCORING SYSTEM? none around me even bothered to give it a try.

    IBF hasn't done anything positively impressive these years. all has been done is embarrassing themselves, the 7 point scoring system for example. and it came again in the form of 21 points.

    and badminton is going to be kicked out of Olympus Games all thanks to IBF.

    in fact, if IBF dies tomorrow, i'll still love this game, if not more; i'll still love the players, if not more; the players will still be playing, if not more and better. and the game will still be loved by many people, if not more.

    SO, WHAT THE HECK DO WE NEED IBF AND WHAT THE HECK THEY ARE DOING THERE?

    so much for complaining.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

  11. #45
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    3,989
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    First off all, as I stated before.. Some ideas can be refuted in theory and doesn't NEED to be tested.. Also if IBF really wanted to "trial" this new system.. Why start with the big toournaments? Why not make for example US (or whatever porblem "market" they try to address) trial it an if it works there maybe it could be considered internationally.. It doesn't make sense to start messing with things at the top level just for "fun"..

    And why 21x3 as you indicated there are almost infinitive variations of scoring and who's to serve rules.. I don't think we need to try out each and every possible combination...At least not if we cannot say the 15x3 scoring is
    a major problem!!

    I agree with you that petitions, etc should be sent to the local IBF guys to make em know how we feel

    Cheers,
    Twobeer

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    What I have been trying to fight for is the right to be tried out first before rubbishing the idea. This is how we progress. The chosen body-yes, chosen by your country's delegates-comes up with a proposal, an action plan for a trial period, and then a decision phase to adopt or reject. This is the due process.
    A part of me tells me that a fairer playing field would allow each player to have an equal number of serves (or as equal as possible), something similar to today's table tennis, and that points can be scored from two points of view-from the server and from the receiver.
    No, I did not in the least feel pissed off when I was not consulted about the change. On the contrary, if you read carefully, the real message is that it is as it should be. It would be inappropriate and a colossal waste of money to inform the badminton fans, players, and supporters of the world about the change directly and individually.
    The final decision will be made by the IBF council members. Now if your country's council member votes for the new system, why the hell did you vote for him? It is more appropriate that you and all the badminton clubs in your country contact him to reject the idea. This way your grievance can be better directed. In this forum it is like a shortgun blast that hits nothing but air. It is not wasted though. Just good to talk about but not an appropriate channel to swing the vote.

  12. #46
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    182
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default 21-point scoring system kills the game

    let's back to the point.

    the main reason for the 21 point scoring system is a predictable game play time. and they are pretty wrong here.

    as the most comparable game, tennis doesn't have a predictable game play time at all (men's long final (5th) set instead of tie break makes the game even longer now). what's worse, the four Grand Slams are all open-door. people don't mind even sitting in the rain in the midnight watching the game which they love, not knowing when it ends. that's the charm of the game. countless classic long-winded matches make the best part of tennis history.

    people come across oceans and mountains to the game they like, people go away from the game they don't like even if it's delivered to door.

    so, unpredictable game time ain't a problem for badminton at all. and don't blame the unpredictable game time when you failed to get more people love this game.

    well, if you insist, that unpredictable game time IS INDEED a big problem, 21-point ain't the solution at all. here is the reason.

    take football and basketball (NBA) for example. they have relatively more predictable game time. football two halves 90 minutes plus the break in between. additional 30 min and penalty kicking for no-draw games. for NBA 4 quarters 48 minutes plus 3 breaks, 6 full time-out and 2 short for each team. unlimited OT until there is a winner. it can easily go beyond 2 hours.

    you see the difference?

    yes, games have to be predictably LONG, not predictably SHORT.

    you hardly find any game that is as short as half an hour. that simply doesn't make it a game: no enough time to get the audience into the game. even for snooker or billard, multi frames ensure long enough game time. it is kinda psycology thing. have you ever watched a movie that is one hour long (short)? that simply doesn't make it a movie (in the common sense).

    games are like stories, catch and run, and you need time to develop the story line and the ups and downs. that's what games are all about: the UNPREDICTABILITY. and that's why people feel games are INTERESTING.

    i just wanna give you another example: the formula 1. a sports with a very predictable race time. but it's damn long if you don't like it.

    21-point scoring system not only makes the game predictably short, but also makes the game itself predictable. it's killing this game.

    AFTERWORD:

    you may not like the examples i give hereand may think they are not comparable. well, tennis, football, NBA and F1 are highly commercialized sports. badminton is just the opposite. and that's why IBF is struggling. COMMERCIALIZATION IS THE ONLY WAY OUT.

  13. #47
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    159
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by franxon
    let's back to the point.

    the main reason for the 21 point scoring system is a predictable game play time. and they are pretty wrong here.

    as the most comparable game, tennis doesn't have a predictable game play time at all (men's long final (5th) set instead of tie break makes the game even longer now). what's worse, the four Grand Slams are all open-door. people don't mind even sitting in the rain in the midnight watching the game which they love, not knowing when it ends. that's the charm of the game. countless classic long-winded matches make the best part of tennis history.

    people come across oceans and mountains to the game they like, people go away from the game they don't like even if it's delivered to door.

    so, unpredictable game time ain't a problem for badminton at all. and don't blame the unpredictable game time when you failed to get more people love this game.

    well, if you insist, that unpredictable game time IS INDEED a big problem, 21-point ain't the solution at all. here is the reason.

    take football and basketball (NBA) for example. they have relatively more predictable game time. football two halves 90 minutes plus the break in between. additional 30 min and penalty kicking for no-draw games. for NBA 4 quarters 48 minutes plus 3 breaks, 6 full time-out and 2 short for each team. unlimited OT until there is a winner. it can easily go beyond 2 hours.

    you see the difference?

    yes, games have to be predictably LONG, not predictably SHORT.

    you hardly find any game that is as short as half an hour. that simply doesn't make it a game: no enough time to get the audience into the game. even for snooker or billard, multi frames ensure long enough game time. it is kinda psycology thing. have you ever watched a movie that is one hour long (short)? that simply doesn't make it a movie (in the common sense).

    games are like stories, catch and run, and you need time to develop the story line and the ups and downs. that's what games are all about: the UNPREDICTABILITY. and that's why people feel games are INTERESTING.

    i just wanna give you another example: the formula 1. a sports with a very predictable race time. but it's damn long if you don't like it.

    21-point scoring system not only makes the game predictably short, but also makes the game itself predictable. it's killing this game.

    AFTERWORD:

    you may not like the examples i give hereand may think they are not comparable. well, tennis, football, NBA and F1 are highly commercialized sports. badminton is just the opposite. and that's why IBF is struggling. COMMERCIALIZATION IS THE ONLY WAY OUT.
    You said it best. I always wanted to explain why it is not good to shorten a game for the sake of making the duration predictabe. You put it nicely.

    Punch Gunalan doesn't get it. After the recent world cup, he said that the new system was a success because it made the game durations predictable and most games finished within 40 minutes. From what he said, it is clear that to them, making a game duration predictable is THE ultimate target. But why? Because he (they) believes that a predictable duration is good for promoting the game. They are so wrong.

    I believe IBF is getting everything wrong. The main problem is not with the scoring format. Why? Let's say after many many experiments with different scoring formats (7x5, 21x3, 31x3, 3x13 etc) and IBF still can't increase the popularity of the game, what do they do next? Hey let's change the size of the court! No effect? Let's change the racquet! Make the racquet two handed just like tennis! Let's change the shuttlecock! Remove the feathers and make the round part larger just like a tennis ball!

    IBF will get to no where if they think changing the game will make the game more popular. It's not the original game anymore. IBF is totally missing the point: The best and only way to promote a game is through marketing exercises, not by changing the game.

    The plain and simple truth is that IBF svcks at marketing. The solution is that they need to employ true marketing talents and professionals.

  14. #48
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DinkAlot
    Wait up? LOL! You're the one that needs some coffee Cooler.
    i seem to stumble and trip over alot when i'm about to smash on your half court lifts

  15. #49
    Regular Member ants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Malaysian Citizen of the World
    Posts
    13,157
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Well since so many pll talk about how IBF sucks etc... and no respond from IBF about it. I see if i can talk to the VP about it the non-official way.

  16. #50
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    2,214
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Excellent, ants!

    Try not to use the "skunk manure" quote, by the way.

    -dave

  17. #51
    Regular Member ants's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Malaysian Citizen of the World
    Posts
    13,157
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by wood_22_chuck
    Excellent, ants!

    Try not to use the "skunk manure" quote, by the way.

    -dave

    Hahah..if you talk to those pll in the streets , you may do that. Anyway its not professional if we talk to other pll like that or by using that kind of quotes. I'm sure you wouldn't like it too right?.

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. new scoring system?
    By james23336 in forum General Forum
    Replies: 4
    : 05-03-2007, 03:13 PM
  2. New Scoring System (21-Rally point system)
    By MikeJ in forum Jonas Rasmussen Forum
    Replies: 21
    : 06-05-2006, 06:03 AM
  3. Replies: 1
    : 05-12-2006, 08:43 PM
  4. new scoring system- 9x5 !!!!
    By N. Usmani in forum General Forum
    Replies: 11
    : 03-18-2002, 03:31 AM
  5. more on 5x7 scoring system
    By cooler in forum General Forum
    Replies: 3
    : 05-01-2001, 08:04 AM

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
  •