Results 103 to 119 of 124
05-12-2006, 12:06 PM #103Originally Posted by kasuya
What ticks me off is the way the scoring change is "marketed" and "pushed trough" without ´grassroot support in the player community!!
Originally Posted by kasuya
We should definitively not makes changes that makes the game require LESS skill and stamina!!
Would you find it "acceptable" if IBF voted to use Mavis 350 for IBF tournaments? Would You find it "acceptable" if they changed to overhead services from behind the baseline???
Originally Posted by kasuya
Originally Posted by kasuya
Last edited by twobeer; 05-12-2006 at 12:11 PM.
05-12-2006, 12:43 PM #104Originally Posted by twobeer
The word "acceptable" was a soft word I used, and it was meant not to strike any negative response from people who are very much against the new system. In fact, my friends and I liked the new system as much since we were more focused on winning every point and ensure we didn't fall behind on score. There was so much intensivity during that game.
You try to make a point using extreme examples such as changing the scoring to 1 point per set, is not much of a strong argument.
Badminton requires much more than what I listed before(physical and mental strength), there are much more things like knowledge of the game, timing of pace changing, mind games---manipulate opponent's emotion status, etc. Some of those things are still required to win a game under the new system. The one thing that most people are concern about is the fact that players are more aware of taking "risk", well guess what... successful people don't avoid risk, they MANAGE risk... so in the case of badminton... go practice more and train on accuracy or something...
05-12-2006, 02:20 PM #105
Just imagine if you are given a computer game, one with 3x15 format and another is 3x21 format.
Would you choose the same physical attributes, strokes, strategy and tactic to play both format?
After testing both formats, which format of the game that you will be spending your hard earn money?
If you are Bill Gates will it be 3X15 or 3x21 should you market in Xbox ?
05-12-2006, 07:46 PM #106
I don't think that's really a relevant inquiry. The actual physical activity has nothing to do with a video game version. And anyway, there doesn't seem to be any badminton video games, which is either due to the lack of influence in the gaming industry or the difficulties in producing a game that can efficiently match the tactical and physical intensity of the game. Otherwise, it'd probably be pretty dull and unrealistic.
05-12-2006, 08:43 PM #107
Try to look at it this way :
The old system is in the strict sense of 'match' not fair because you cannot win a point for a rally won when not serving. How can you not win a point for winning a rally? Winning the right to serve is justice delayed, and justice delayed is justice denied. It is against natural justice. The mental state of the player is also different when serving and when receiving, one high the other low, thus reducing the real spirit of an all out 'combatants war'. It is like a mini 'tea break' in between serves. It also had to devise three different scoring systems for the same game of badminton! The new system will demand 100% focus, concentration, no 'siestas' in between, and for a change, real intensity and quality shots.
05-12-2006, 09:27 PM #108
Now thats just dumb
To me 21x3 is Not badminton at all, it is a RACE - thats right its a 21 Point race to see who makes less errors.
Some of the best matches this year were the ones before the experimental scoring started - great comebacks and drama - and then 21x3 came, now the action is usually the same but overall its not better.
Its a race to make less errors over a pre-determined Number of serves or rallies - and thats all it is.
Now for pro-badminton it would be fine to me if this was temporary - but overall and for ALL Badminton players in general, this is bad because Way too many people are simply just going to refuse to use this system - myself included. - This sport needs unity and this is a step in the wrong direction in my opinion.
Last edited by wedgewenis; 05-12-2006 at 09:29 PM.
05-12-2006, 10:58 PM #109
Personally I am in favour of the old system 15x3 however unless something gets done I suppose I will have to play with the new system from now on since I play competitively. I have tried the new system out in friendlys and watched it in play in competitive matches and I must say it doesnt feel like the badminton Ive gotten used to.
Right now I am not impressed with the IBF Mr Gunalan in particular but I suspect this may have something to do with the IBF in general. I cannot believe there was no resistance to this change and this was so that is just an indicator of how out of touch the IBF is with the fans and that it has to go. An example of the pig headedness of the IBF at the momment I find is the article on Mr Gunalans treatment of the Russian badminton http://www.badmintoncentral.com/badm...nt/view/111/2/
At the momment I dont beleive they have the interests of badminton fans at heart and that alone in itself is a reason why the IBF should NOT represent badminton in general. I see why they are implementing this change but I dont agree with sacrificing the game for TV time is worth it and some of the reasons given I do not agree with. There is nothing wrong with a duck! (15-0) thats just a very good indicator for differences in skill levels and that you should probably be playing with someone your own level, and isnt a good enough reason to implement the changes when there is so much fan based opposition to it.
Anyway Ill end this rant with I hope something is done about this mess and the IBF is scrapped with another body that actually gives a damn about us the fans!
05-13-2006, 01:06 AM #110Originally Posted by tk009
05-13-2006, 01:18 AM #111Originally Posted by taneepak
The rights or wrongs of the RBF's side of things is irrelevant, particularly now it is defunct.
05-13-2006, 01:40 AM #112Originally Posted by taneepak
i'm sure you know the whole intent behind this "new"(21x3) scoring system, it's nothing more than an attempt by Mr. Gunalan to market and promote the game more, that's corrent isn't it??..Nothing more and nothing less, even he admitted it..
Now if the "old", previous scoring system was so lame, why did it take this long of an attempt to change it?? Did IBF just all of a sudden thought about the idea overnight?? I'm sure the IBF have thought about changing the scoring system before many2 times(incl. the 5x7). I think IBF is trying to mimic the game of tennis and table tennis too much, whilst they should stay with the original game standard and it's uniqueness and try to promote it in a different way, if this is the main purpose of Mr. Gunalan.
05-13-2006, 01:48 AM #113Originally Posted by ctjcad
05-13-2006, 02:20 AM #114
What contributes is clarity, not fuzziness.
05-13-2006, 03:52 AM #115Originally Posted by CWB001
I would suggest we do not get involved in complex issues that we know very little about, to avoid looking foolish with eggs all over our face.
05-13-2006, 04:07 AM #116Originally Posted by wedgewenis
05-13-2006, 06:35 AM #117The old system is in the strict sense of 'match' not fair because you cannot win a point for a rally won when not serving. How can you not win a point for winning a rally? Winning the right to serve is justice delayed, and justice delayed is justice denied. It is against natural justice.
“In badminton the scale are heavily tipped in favour of receiver, because of the rules governing the server and the height of the net”
It is therefore logical for the server to win a point and the receiver to win the right to serve.
You could still argue that 3x21 will place both sides in favour position as receiver when he/she has lost a rally and it is still a fair system compare to 3x15.
But we are now talking about two completely different systems. Many in this forum have been voiced that the 3x21 is less challenging to play in comparison to the 3x15, and IBF has implied that it is physically less demanding too (though we could always disagree with IBF!).
Until someone could quantify that the 3x21 is more challenging to play then the 3x15; I will be in favour of the 3x15, what a beautiful game!
05-13-2006, 06:39 AM #118
Why its 3X21 rally instead of 3X15? The play is now 2times shorter!
I think it should be 5X21 (as in volleyball) or 3X31!
05-13-2006, 11:51 AM #119Originally Posted by kasuya
weaker players may like this system, as it a) gives them a better chance against a slighty better opponent and b) it requires less physique..
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 serviceover in forum General ForumReplies: 7: 02-21-2006, 08:19 AM
By cheongsa in forum Singapore Open 2005 / Malaysia Open 2005Replies: 1: 06-29-2005, 07:01 AM
By dave C in forum General ForumReplies: 6: 03-20-2001, 07:41 AM