Taken from the IBF website report on the recently concluded European Championships, it appears that Peter Gade has gotten used to the new system: When asked about his experience at the European Championships with the new scoring system, Gade admits he likes the new scoring system more now than in the beginning. "Now that every point counts, the game gets more exciting than with the old system, although I still favour the 5x7 format, where the exciting moments can last longer." In another report in Singapore's Today, April 12, 2206, Punch Gunalan reassured Singapore Badminton Association President Lim Swee Say that the top badminton stars will continue to participate in the Aviva Singapore Open (ASO) to be held from June 5-11, despite the very thight schedule surrounding the ASO as follows: Apr 28-May 7: Thomas and Uber Cup Finals (Japan) May24-28: Philippines Open (4 star, US$120,000) May 31-June 4: Indonesia Open (6 star, US$250,000) Jun 5-11: Singapore Open (5 star US$170,000) Jun 13-18: Malaysia Open (4 star, US$120,000) Jun 20-25: Chinese Taipei Open (5star, US$170,000) Jun 28-Jul 2: Vietnam Open (1 star, US$30,000) June seems to be a jam-packed month for badminton fans and the Singapore Open is sandwiched between a 6 star and another 4 and 5 star opens. Gunalan explained: "I think Singapore is a certainty as far as the top shuttlers are concerned. Singapore is sandwiched between the three big competitions, so it makes travel sense for the Indonesian and Malaysian stars to want to play in Singapore. "Indeed, the ease of travel due to the proximity of the three countries mean shuttlers will have no problem making the tournament." Gunalan added that the new 21-point scoring system will play a significant role in helping players take on a packed badminton calendar. He said: "The new scoring system was well received at the Melbourne Commonwealth Games and so is likely to stay. "Although the final decision will only be made in May after the Thomas and Uber Cup finals, I have not heard any opposing views, so I'm very confident the mandate will be passed. "The new system makes playing time shorter and is not so physically taxing on the players. That means they should be able to take on more competitions."
Interesting. He actually said that he still prefers the old system. And Punch-drunk Gunalan is now saying that the shorter matches means that players will now be able to play more. This, of course, contradicts one of his ostensible reasons for making the change - to give the players more rest and a longer career. He also says that the system was well-received at the Commonwealth Games. I wonder what his objective reasoning behind that statement is.
It is apparent from Punch Drunk's phrasing that we're going to be stuck with this system for a loooong time.
This is funny ey. Shorter matches = More breaks for players = Better recovery = Increased ability to play in more competitions = More Competitions. Equations is retarded but heck it works .
Hey Guys, Don't punch Punch so hard. I met him at the Commonwealth Games, Melbourne 2006. He is a nice guy. I think he cares very much for Badminton. What he is saying is he is comparing Badminton to Athletics. A marathon runner selects 2 races to run a year, while a sprinter can select 6 races. I rather want to watch my favourite star playing 6 matches a year.
Peter Gade, recently express itself similarly to the press agency AFP: "I cannot imagine that the IBF prefers this system. For me is a pure political affair. Table tennis had the last 50 years exactly this system. They changed it with large success on 5x11, because the old system was not tv fitting. And now we take this system and believe, that would be the best system for us. Nobody could bring me so far a reason for it. We had the chance to make badminton more exciting. With 15 point system a match can be exciting only with 11-11 or 12-12. And now we play to 21, which makes still worse all. All pure politics. I think, the Asian people regret it now that they not have taken the 5x7 system and now naturally can't any longer back. 5x7 is the best system for our kind of sport ", explains Peter Gade. He said this to the press!
I am sure that Punch is a charming person in private. What we're concerned with here is his actions as the IBF President. I am also sure Punch loves badminton. In fact, he loves badminton so much that he risks hugging it to death.
Once again Punch Drunk's logic is exposed as ... well illogical. Marathon runners run 2 or 3 races a year because the races and training are so gruelling given the distances they run. Sprinters can race twice in an afternoon. Which badminton players play events like the marathon and which of them are involved in events like a 100m sprint? Well, none actually. My 15 year old son is on the UK badminton junior circuit. He and his peers play around twenty ranked events a year. Most of these itournaments nvolves 3x15 in 2 or 3 disciplines. On a successful Saturday he will play 20-24 games of badminton at full effort. These players are fit enough to do this and not be stiff or knackered the next day despite their bodies having to put a lot of energy into growing. Are the professionals not fitter than these youngsters? Arguments that Punch is well meaning in his attempts to improve the sport are irrelevant. Adolf Hitler was well meaning and sincere in his dedication to gain more space for the Germans. Look where that ended up. There is no evidence that these scoring changes will mean as much as an extra minute of TV time or any extra TV audience.
Yes, this is very heated up. But I cannot understand why we are punching Punch alone. All badminton players now should be punching themselves.
lol I dont understand why everybody is punching Punch lol Is everyone just picking on him becoz of his name? haha If you visit this page.. http://www.badmintoninternational.net/website/ibf.asp It says PRESIDENT : Dr Kang Young Joong Shouldn't he be targeted rather than punch lol
I think this is one of the reasons why any new system is so hard to be accepted. In a championship event, out of X participants, there is only one winner. When an interviewer asks all the X participants, “How do you like the new scoring system?”, he should not be surprised to get 1 for it, and (X-1) against it. Peter Gade defeated his Danish compatriot Kenneth Jonassen to win his fourth gold medal in the men’s singles event at the European Championships 2006 under the new 3x21 system. You should be able to guess what he would say. Personally, I prefer the 5x7 format, the format that Peter likes best. As Peter said many times that we must change because “our old 3x15 format is not TV fitting”. But the 5x7 format was defeated and it is now history. Now the 3x21 format is in some way similar to the 5x7... “more TV fitting”. But will we change? Well, the 5x7 format was suggested by the European fraction(please correct me if I am wrong), and the Asian fraction did not want to take it up. Now if the 3x21 format suggested by the Asian fraction is not taken up because we remember the past politics, badminton will be like a child who will never grow up. Some older people who had watched many developments in different sports will understand what I mean. Remember those days when there was no tie-breaker in Tennis. Remember those days when there was no penalty shoot-out in Soccer. When those sports were trying to change to new scoring system(to be TV fitting), there were lots of debates too. Anyway, changes were made and most Tennis and Soccer Players are now happier and richer than most of us.
Great badminton is already nicknamed "backyard sport" by North America and an official from IBF says that they will make the sport easier... Old scoring system all the way~~
I consider myself fairly middle-of-the-road in this matter. May be leaning towards the old system a little, but still neutral. And I do understand that practically anything must continue to evolve if they were to survive. However, I do believe---those who disagree with what I'm about to say are welcome to smack me upside the head, if you can find me that is ---that most of the outrage regarding the new system boil down to two things: - It changes one of the basic premises of the game. - It appears to be not well thought out at all, with no sound reason given other than "it should increase the popularity of the sport." Based on what research, nobody outside of IBF seem to know. Even those who are inside the IBF don't seem to know either. The two examples you've given, tennis and soccer, aren't really comparable because IMHO they aren't as drastic as the new scoring system that's being proposed now. Let's tackle tennis first. The tie-breaker system is still a rally system and its use is actually quite optional. (Wimbledon don't use it in the 5th set.) An equally drastic change would be, for instance, to adopt the old table-tennis scoring system to shorten tennis matches. There have been a lot of complaints of burnouts made by players, so let's shorten the matches as well as the season, shall we? Or, eliminate the 2 service chances. IOW, 1 serve only, possible with no lets. IIRC, this has actually been proposed many times in the past to take away the power in the men's game which many say have made tennis rather dull to watch. Everytime this proposal comes up, the outrage amongst tennis players, administrators and fans is quite deafening with one of the complaints being, you guessed it, it changes the fundamentals of the sport. So, it never goes anywhere. The soccer penalty shootout was a bigger change, I think; but, again its use is really quite limited in a sense that it's only used as the last resort to determine a positive outcome after points, goal differences and goals scored. Except in final matches, of course. Even then it's only if the 2 15-minute overtime periods fail to break the deadlock. Personally, I love penalty shootouts. I think they're exciting and suspenseful. But, imagine for a minute if you can, me as a FIFA chief proposing that to make soccer more popular in the US soccer matches are to be played in 4 15-minute periods with straight to penalties to break draws. Care to imagine what the outrage from fans, players and practically anyone who can spell s-o-c-c-e-r would be like? More importantly, can you blame them? You don't actually have to imagine it because it's actually been tried. It was called the Major League Soccer here in the US. They didn't go so far as the 4 15-minute periods (did they?), but they instituted many changes to make the game more "exciting" in their opinion. In the end, all they've got to show for were empty stadiums and tens of millions of dollars of debt. Then they hired a new commissioner who promptly reverted back to FIFA rules to win back the traditional fan base. Now, I believe they're operating with an excess of 40 million dollars in the bank. Enough to finance WUSA for its lifetime. But, even with all that said, I'm 99% positive that IBF would gain a lot of converts to its proposal if they go and lay out their sound reasoning behind it to (pro) players, coaches, administrators and fans. Lay out all the marketing researches that they've done, opinion polls, small test run results, etc. that've made them come to the 3x21 rally-based system proposal. Lay them all out so that even the harshest of critics would have a hard time finding a fault in their reasoning. That'd do wonders for IBF's credibility in this regard, IMHO. FWIW. P.S.: Though not necessarily 3x21, rally-based scoring in badminton is actually nothing new. 1-day HS tournaments here have actually used it for years, if only for the 3rd set. And the only reason it's used has nothing to do with suspense and higher excitement level. It's used simply to cut time so that the tournament can be finished in 1 day without going into the evening hours. That's all.
