User Tag List

Page 12 of 27 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ... LastLast
Results 188 to 204 of 449
  1. #188
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    3,989
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Loh
    Who would have imagined a player scoring 8 points in a row to defeat the world's no.1 player, Lin Dan at such a crucial stage as match point for him?
    Just one mistake from LCW was enough for Lin Dan to win the game and match!

    So, the 'kampong boy" LCW has brought a new dimension to his game. Maybe the fear of losing his crown kept him going. But he remained focused and did not allow any hint of that to flow into his game. Instead he steadied himself and traded point for point with the 'almighty' Lin until Lin himself became frustrated and lost points with shots not clearing the net and wild smashes outside of court.

    The mental strength of LCW has prevailed!
    LCW did the "almost" impossible.. But to me this indicates even more how silly the 21x3 scoring is... What if LD got "lucky" just once with a line-judge in the final points.. or would have gotten one net-roll..

    Don't get me wrong the comeback was simply amazing.. and they way i saw it much was attributed to LCWs many flick serves, he caught lin dan a little bit late to the back doing a drop and then a good stop by LCW to set the rally up for him.

    At 20-17 the stop was a little bit to high and LCW got abit lucky as the netkill on the stop was just long...

    To me the 21x3 destroyed a bit of the excitement here, as I more or less felt the match was over at 20-13 so the points between 13 and 19 got kind of wasted (excitment wise) as LD only needed to do one killing shot or just get lucky once...

    I am curios to see if any of the 21x3 advocates watched the match and really felt any excitment at 20-15 for example?? To me it would have been much more exciting with old 14-7 LCW with serve.. and win 7 consecutive points..
    (or even loose on some of his serves and get back service)

    cheers,
    Twobeer
    Last edited by twobeer; 06-20-2006 at 06:21 PM.

  2. #189
    Regular Member wwcbro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    16°50'N 3°0'W
    Posts
    223
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chris@ccc


    Hi wwcbro,

    From your post (#145), you are puzzled. Is it because of my Post (#144, quoted here)?

    If you are, you must ask very specific question, because many contributors in Badminton Central can enlighten you.

    I assume that you do not understand what I mean, about the difference between a stroke and a shot.

    This example, perhaps, can illustrate what I mean.

    Let us say, you and I are playing a game of Singles.
    You did an Underarm Clear to my backhand corner. And I, under pressure, wanted to return a safe and controlled shot, namely the Overhead Clear, back to you.

    So, in order to do the Overhead Clear(the shot), I would be preparing myself to perform the Overhead Clear(the stroke). But let's say I mishit the shuttle with my racket because of mistiming. My intended Overhead Clear(the stroke) produced an Overhead Dropshot(the shot).

    Some spectators might think that I have performed an excellent Overhead Dropshot(the shot) on purpose, and they did not realise that I was actually executing the Overhead Clear(the stroke). It was by my mishit that the shot resulted as a Dropshot.

    But players with experience will know exactly what happened with my stroke and my shot.

    I hope that I have not confused you more.

    Cheers... chris@ccc



    Hi Chris,

    Thank you for taking time to address my post. You're quite right that one need to be specific in one's question. But, my question was not meant to be specific at all, it was more a general summation of the number of posts devoted to these 2 threads in 2 different sub-forum which over more or less, over the same argument; NSS or OSS ?. I think after a few pages of the posts....we, the readers tend to lose sight as to the actual points of the thread.

    Hence, my "blurred" expression.

    Regardless, I leave it to you and the rest of the fine gentlemen to bash it out.
    But, personally I have enjoyed watching the recent tournament matches under NSS.

  3. #190
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Again, pls let us stick to the subject-is it better to attack in the NSS? Perhaps, to spare this thread from being used for the wrong topics we should start a new thread "Which is better : OSS or NSS?". This should go some way to ensure this thread does not get buried with topics that take us away from what we are trying to learn here.
    Chai, you may want to consider taking this on. At least we have a proper channel (thread) to look into the controversy of the OSS/NSS in splendid isolation and totality.

  4. #191
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,747
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Loh
    "Yes it is possible, depending on the quality of Han Jian's shot, the amount of "harm, hurt, damage and pain" inflicted on his opponent and the end results" And the harm inflicted could be both physical and mental!

    We have seen how much damage a good quality attacking clear can do to the receiver, not necessary a smash or a fast drop shot!

    So, much depends on circumstances and the outcome of the rally.
    Sort of confusing here - Bao did a good quality attacking clear (in my opinion) which PG scrambled to the baseline to scramble to return. You considered PG baseline return to the net an attacking shot because it scored.

    Well, I have to disagree. PG was in a 'no initiative' situation and choice of shots is very limited. He succeeded because, first and foremost was Bao's mistake (overcommitting to one side and neglecting the other); secondly PG high quality return and a nicely placed. It wouldn't have succeeded if Bao considered his forehand side too.


    Yes, in a rally a lot of situations can happen. Service is not so much, you have rules on how to perform your stroke, and the destination area is somewhat more limited. Advantageous to serve?

  5. #192
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,747
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I am not sure if I misunderstood your post. Are you saying that we need to find a good coach to teach us the art of badminton because we are not agreeing to your views?

    My apologies if I misunderstood, and we can continue with the discussion regarding the topic.


    Quote Originally Posted by chris@ccc

    To me, a Demonstration is essential to teach “The Art of Doing Anything”, whether it is the Art of Playing the Piano, the Art of Painting, the Art of Cooking, the Art of Kung Fu, etc, etc...

    So, after all that I have said above, don't worry too much about it. Enjoy Badminton as you have done in the past. But to learn the “The Art of Playing Badminton”, it is best to get a qualified coach to demonstrate it to you.

    Cheers... chris@ccc


    Last edited by viver; 06-21-2006 at 03:03 AM.

  6. #193
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Let us stick to the topic. Is it that hard to do?

  7. #194
    Regular Member Loh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Singapore Also Can
    Posts
    11,892
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by viver
    Sort of confusing here - Bao did a good quality attacking clear (in my opinion) which PG scrambled to the baseline to scramble to return. You considered PG baseline return to the net an attacking shot because it scored.

    Well, I have to disagree. PG was in a 'no initiative' situation and choice of shots is very limited. He succeeded because, first and foremost was Bao's mistake (overcommitting to one side and neglecting the other); secondly PG high quality return and a nicely placed. It wouldn't have succeeded if Bao considered his forehand side too.
    When I first joined in this discusssion, I had preconceived ideas on what an attacking and defensive shot should be. But with the inputs from all of you, especially from Chris, I have now learned and accepted a much wider concept to embrace that even a seemingly under arm/hand, defensive stroke can be turned into an attacking shot if the end result is that it could cause difficulty, damage and 'harm' to your opponent, such that he could not play his choice return which may win him a point. Instead he may be forced to make a weak return, hit the net or totally missed it.

    One other consideration is that though a shot may first start off a defensive one, ie, hit below the arm, so long as when it cleared the net, it dips downwards below net height thus making it difficult or impossible for the opponent to kill with a smash, like the surprise that Bao had because he failed to anticipate what PG could do, then the equation has changed for PG from having to play a defensive shot which turned out to be a winner. PG has caused Bao into some form of difficulty in space and time which resulted in an error.

    I'm keeping an open mind and will gladly learn from whoever is able to convince me of the merits of each case.

  8. #195
    Regular Member chris-ccc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    26,691
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default To learn the Art of Doing Anything , you need a demonstration

    Quote Originally Posted by viver
    I am not sure if I misunderstood your post. Are you saying that we need to find a good coach to teach us the art of badminton because we are not agreeing to your views?

    My apologies if I misunderstood, and we can continue with the discussion regarding the topic.
    No viver,

    As you have quoted my post(#185), in your post of #192, I mean that you need to get SOMEONE(who understand what/how I mean about an "attacking" service) TO DEMONSTRATE how an "attacking" service is performed and what it looks like.

    It has nothing to do with changing our views.

    I was merely saying that A Demonstration is Essential if we are trying to understand/learn The Art of Doing Anything.

    As some of us are involved in Karate, an Art of Self-Defense, I will use this example here. Our Karate Master will find it hard to explain or to make us understand certain stance/movement, if he is not able to demonstrate it to us.

    Cheers... chris@ccc




  9. #196
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, Canada
    Posts
    2,371
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    This gotta be one of the most amusing threads on the forum...

    on-topic, off-topic, on-topic, off-topic, on and on...surprised that Kwun or anyone of the moderators have not closed this one yet.

    My reply to the original topic is "It depends". The OSS and the NSS neither preclude one playing style over the other but rather provided different venues/options as to how to play to win depending on your opponent.

  10. #197
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    6,302
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    You get it bang on! QED . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by Winex West Can
    This gotta be one of the most amusing threads on the forum...

    on-topic, off-topic, on-topic, off-topic, on and on...surprised that Kwun or anyone of the moderators have not closed this one yet.

    My reply to the original topic is "It depends". The OSS and the NSS neither preclude one playing style over the other but rather provided different venues/options as to how to play to win depending on your opponent.

  11. #198
    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 Winex West Can
    This gotta be one of the most amusing threads on the forum...

    on-topic, off-topic, on-topic, off-topic, on and on...surprised that Kwun or anyone of the moderators have not closed this one yet.

    My reply to the original topic is "It depends". The OSS and the NSS neither preclude one playing style over the other but rather provided different venues/options as to how to play to win depending on your opponent.
    i agree.
    some people like to make it sound more complicated or knowledgable in a already non-simple game. In singles, basic tactic (offense vs defense) application on NSS or OSS tactic makes not much different in my opinion, just more attention (mental) to eliminate unforced errors and knowing(mental) your opponent strength and weakness. These are all about u, not them. It's a thinking game. If u have a preconceived plan to employ attacking tactic on all players and matches, i assure u won't go far. **

    Remember there was a thread about how to slow down a fast paced opponent? Many advices were given to slow down your opponent. If NSS benefits attacking players, couldn't the other side just apply the 'slowing down' techniques? LOL

    Fortunately, my pyrimad still applies to both NSS and OSS.


    ** for pros level where they already all the strokes and techniques.
    Last edited by cooler; 06-21-2006 at 06:28 PM.

  12. #199
    Regular Member chris-ccc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    26,691
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default So it could be just a BLUFF

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    Let us stick to the topic. Is it that hard to do?
    Thank you taneepak,

    Let us stick to the topic and rescue this thread.


    I am glad that Winex West Can(post#196), Pete LSD(post#197) and cooler(Post#198) came to the rescue too.

    Winex West Can and Pete LSD replied that the OSS and the NSS neither preclude one playing style over the other. Up to this moment in time for the NSS, I tend to agree with you guys.

    So, why some coaches and players think that it is better to Attack when playing in the NSS really puzzles me.

    And cooler made this statement;
    In singles, basic tactic (offense vs defense) application on NSS or OSS tactic makes not much different in my opinion, just more attention (mental) to eliminate unforced errors and knowing(mental) your opponent strength and weakness.

    So cooler is in agreement too.


    If you go back to Post#1 and read the last 2 paragraphs, you will find that I was implying that we don't have to change our style of playing Singles just because of the NSS.


    Come to think of it... may be the coaches and players wanted to bluff the other teams indicating that they know how to deal with the change, and that they know how to use the NSS to their advantage.

    Or, did they really find something new that we haven't found yet?


    Cheers... chris@ccc


  13. #200
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Any difference between the OSS and the NSS can be found between your ears. You can read this any way you like.

  14. #201
    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 taneepak
    Any difference between the OSS and the NSS can be found between your ears. You can read this any way you like.
    The above is in respect to whether it is better to attack under the NSS.

  15. #202
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    ok, singles have been covered.
    In doubles, I think some adjustments maybe required but again they're mostly mentally based. Under NSS, serving becomes much more important. A bad serve will set you up for a losing rally, point lost. A really bad serve may get you hitting the net, too short or too long, or a bad service call, point lost again. However, once the rally get going, the players play to win using the same old tactic and skills as in their previous OSS ways.

    As for comments from some coaches, i don't think they even know how to exploit the NSS yet. A smart coach will watch and learn. Things said to the media are just content to fill the interviewing time. A smart player would hide his form and stroke from his opponents, I would say a smart coach wouldn't give out their REAL game plan to the media, right?
    Last edited by cooler; 06-22-2006 at 02:28 AM.

  16. #203
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,747
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hmm, I know in Australia are a lot of good Chinese coaches - they may explain to you about the theories of service in badminton the way I learned it. When I studied badminton, I was under the supervision of a coach from China for 300H (yes, 3 hundred). Zhang Ailing and Chen Changjie, I heard were under this same coach too.

    Never a single time ever was mentioned something like 'attacking' serve, if it exists then it must be added to the curriculum for the Chinese National badminton coaching course.


    Quote Originally Posted by chris@ccc
    No viver,

    As you have quoted my post(#185), in your post of #192, I mean that you need to get SOMEONE(who understand what/how I mean about an "attacking" service) TO DEMONSTRATE how an "attacking" service is performed and what it looks like.

    It has nothing to do with changing our views.

    I was merely saying that A Demonstration is Essential if we are trying to understand/learn The Art of Doing Anything.


    Last edited by viver; 06-22-2006 at 02:46 AM.

  17. #204
    Regular Member Loh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Singapore Also Can
    Posts
    11,892
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    [QUOTE=cooler]i agree.
    some people like to make it sound more complicated or knowledgable in a already non-simple game. In singles, basic tactic (offense vs defense) application on NSS or OSS tactic makes not much different in my opinion, just more attention (mental) to eliminate unforced errors and knowing(mental) your opponent strength and weakness. These are all about u, not them. It's a thinking game. If u have a preconceived plan to employ attacking tactic on all players and matches, i assure u won't go far. **
    QUOTE]

    Remember you were a participant in this discussion and you injected off-topic issues as well. You must therefore thank your lucky stars that none of the moderators had the mind of WWC, otherwise your "knowledgeable" contributions may be deleted too.

    On your point of smart coaches and players who will not reveal their hand, it won't take long for opponents to find this out as they are permitted to use video cameras to record every move of their prospective rivals.

Page 12 of 27 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. 2x21 rally, 12 rally scoring system in 3rd game to increase the excitement of game.
    By wisdomcivet in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / Officiating
    Replies: 12
    : 03-07-2011, 07:15 PM
  2. 21 Rally Point Scoring System
    By Break-My-String in forum Coaching Forum
    Replies: 0
    : 11-08-2006, 05:47 AM
  3. New Scoring System (21-Rally point system)
    By MikeJ in forum Jonas Rasmussen Forum
    Replies: 21
    : 06-05-2006, 06:03 AM
  4. Mixed responses to 21-point rally scoring system
    By ants in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / Officiating
    Replies: 50
    : 04-26-2006, 04:40 PM
  5. Replies: 11
    : 01-05-2003, 01:55 PM

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
  •