21 rally-point scoring system: Is it really better to Attack?

**wwcbro** · 06-25-2006, 12:19 AM

Suggested readings......

**taneepak** · 06-25-2006, 12:45 AM

Originally Posted by twobeer

I think this thread us way off topic and seems to become an argument weather the serve is offensive or defensive....

Personally I think NSS will lead to more double type serving in singles (short serves and more flick serves than before)..

I think putting more emphasis on the serve is bad for the entertainment value of watching and playing high-level games...(In double it becomes close to ridiclious as serving/receiving was so important even before the NSS).

I think the argument that NSS would promote a more attacking game would be that it is more physically demanding to be "early" on the shuttle, do constant jumpsmashes and avoid overhead backhands etc..and the NSS being shorter, makes it "easier" to attain the fittness to be able to do this for a complete match. But this was also the case with 7x5.. So the way i see it its more an effect of having shorter games, and not an effect of the rally scoring..

Some in-sightful and discerning comments.
Re more 'doubles-like' low and flick-serves being used in singles in the NSS, this has also been the trend in the OSS, particularly in MS. The low and flick-serve in MS was unheard of in the old days. The then experts and world champions would think you were mad serving low in singles then. How things have changed! In WS the low serve is less used because women do not have the strength and athleticlism of men. Instead WS uses more high serves than in MS, but their high serves are not defensive in nature or intent. Do you think Wang Chen's or Roslin's high serves are for defence?
The NSS would not change the importance of the serve except to make it more critical and over time to be a catalyst to better and higher quality serves. In MS the NSS will see various ways to seize the initiative early-we now see low serves and flick-serves combination executed more effectively and the receiver rushing the serve or doing more deception. But by and large the NSS will not result in a 'doubles-type' serve although they look similar. In MS under both the OSS and the NSS the player does not stand at the very front service line to serve, so there is a longer time factor than in doubles. In MS the low serve travels a longer distance.

**CWB001** · 06-25-2006, 03:50 AM

Originally Posted by taneepak

The NSS would not change the importance of the serve except to make it more critical and over time to be a catalyst to better and higher quality serves.

Hm. There is a contradiction in there. Making the serve more critical IS changing its importance.

**viver** · 06-25-2006, 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by wwcbro

Suggested readings......

.. I assume you are referring to the service issue.

If BC/BF is a good place to find (correct) information, we are just trying to do our best to provide it.

I (and others BFers included) were taught and trained under 1 concept, while others are disputing the same concept. We learned from reputatble coaches and if there are other lines of thought, it is just good to learn them as well - provided that we find them reasonable and applicable.

**viver** · 06-25-2006, 04:50 PM

Originally Posted by Winex West Can

It doesn't matter how low you managed to serve if you don't have the right pace to the shuttle as I can be there at the net as the shuttle is crossing over and it's over for the server.

Yes, this is what we are trying to tell all the time - plus rythm disruption and shuttle placement against the receiver.

If you have gone through the posts, there is somewhere that claimed there is a perfect serve - no matter what you do you won't be able to attack it. The receiver's only option is to lift (if possible to the receiver) and the server will continue with the attack.

In order to continue with the discussion on this topic '21x3: Is is really better to attack' (??), I believe we have to make this point clear - can you attack when serving?

I never heard about the perfect serve. Never heard about attacking serve (or service). All the coaches I had, including Chinese national level coaches always stressed the 'no initiative' situation of the server, therefore the importance of defensive and counter attack skills development to score in 15x3 system.

I am looking to learn more from our illustrious contributors and the sources of their materials.

Still waiting ...

PS: apologies for the bold characters... might be Chris influence

**viver** · 06-25-2006, 05:12 PM

Originally Posted by taneepak

The low and flick-serve in MS was unheard of in the old days.

Other than the questions I had for you (still waiting for the sources of your materials), if you do not mind, here's one more: how 'old' is the old days you mean here?

In 1985, we can see Zhao Jianhua in AE'85, varied his serves effectively against Liem Swie King.

Yang Yang, did also the same in various matches.

Therefore, how old is old?

**Winex West Can** · 06-25-2006, 06:43 PM

Originally Posted by viver

Yes, this is what we are trying to tell all the time - plus rythm disruption and shuttle placement against the receiver.

If you have gone through the posts, there is somewhere that claimed there is a perfect serve - no matter what you do you won't be able to attack it. The receiver's only option is to lift (if possible to the receiver) and the server will continue with the attack.

In order to continue with the discussion on this topic '21x3: Is is really better to attack' (??), I believe we have to make this point clear - can you attack when serving?

I never heard about the perfect serve. Never heard about attacking serve (or service). All the coaches I had, including Chinese national level coaches always stressed the 'no initiative' situation of the server, therefore the importance of defensive and counter attack skills development to score in 15x3 system.

I am looking to learn more from our illustrious contributors and the sources of their materials.

Still waiting ...

PS: apologies for the bold characters... might be Chris influence

Let's put it this way. If there is a prefect serve, the pros would have found it and used it effectively. The only one that I can think of is the S-serve which with its crazy flight caused fits in a lot of players at that time and the only way to "defend" against it was to wait until the shuttle has spun out of its spin which basically meant hitting it well below net level. Unfortunately or fortunately, it was banned as it truly gave the server unfair advantage.

**viver** · 06-25-2006, 07:50 PM

Originally Posted by Winex West Can

Let's put it this way. If there is a prefect serve, the pros would have found it and used it effectively. The only one that I can think of is the S-serve which with its crazy flight caused fits in a lot of players at that time and the only way to "defend" against it was to wait until the shuttle has spun out of its spin which basically meant hitting it well below net level. Unfortunately or fortunately, it was banned as it truly gave the server unfair advantage.

Hehe, if there was a perfect serve, IBF wouldn't need to change the scoring system, would they?

**cooler** · 06-25-2006, 07:50 PM

Originally Posted by Winex West Can

Let's put it this way. If there is a prefect serve, the pros would have found it and used it effectively. The only one that I can think of is the S-serve which with its crazy flight caused fits in a lot of players at that time and the only way to "defend" against it was to wait until the shuttle has spun out of its spin which basically meant hitting it well below net level. Unfortunately or fortunately, it was banned as it truly gave the server unfair advantage.

that is why tennis is a bit boring sometime, if a player is hot in serving, 50% of the games are won with hardly any rallies. If both sides serving great, it's one boring match. It becomes a serving contest, like a side show

**Winex West Can** · 06-26-2006, 12:47 AM

Originally Posted by viver

Hehe, if there was a perfect serve, IBF wouldn't need to change the scoring system, would they?

Nah, they would claiming that they need to make the game more exciting for TV and the N. American audiences

I think that if the IBF decide to make it fairer for the server, they should do away with the doubles serve back line, opening up the court just like in singles. That way, you can be sure that the receiver won't be toeing the front line anymore.

**cooler** · 06-26-2006, 02:04 AM

Originally Posted by Winex West Can

Nah, they would claiming that they need to make the game more exciting for TV and the N. American audiences

I think that if the IBF decide to make it fairer for the server, they should do away with the doubles serve back line, opening up the court just like in singles. That way, you can be sure that the receiver won't be toeing the front line anymore.

that's a good point worth examing. Doing away with the short service line would make the service - receiving exchange more neutral, similar to that of Singles plus that it would be easier for the new tv audience to understand the doubles game.

**Loh** · 06-26-2006, 03:38 AM

What Lee Chong Wei said when he lost in the rubber game against Lin Dan at the Yonex Chinese Taipei Open 2006" as reported todqy in IBF News.

Quote

Unlike in Malaysia where Lin refused the traditional celebrations of the Kuching medal ceremony, this time, he threw his bouquet to the crowd and invited Lee (Chong Wei) to join him on the podium. Lee, accepting his fate in the spirit of sportsmanship, said, “I was planning to play Lin Dan at the net but he was attacking so much that I got very tired towards the end of the match.”

Unquote

**sendoh** · 06-26-2006, 07:37 PM

Originally Posted by viver

Hehe, if there was a perfect serve, IBF wouldn't need to change the scoring system, would they?

GENERALLY, the stupid IBF do not change the system in order to improve players' servings and skills, it just wants to shorten playing times and allow those lousier players to have higher chances of beating top players (these scenarios have been happening now after this stupid new system is implemented), something which make sure badminton event looks better during next Olympic where lousier ones don't always get mauling from the better ones.

**psychict** · 06-26-2006, 09:02 PM

I so agree with sendoh on IBF, it's not the skills or the game that matters... It's all about TV ratings and the 'excitement' of the game... Somehow sports becomes somewhat of an entertainment circle nowadays...

**FEND.** · 06-26-2006, 09:36 PM

Originally Posted by psychict

I so agree with sendoh on IBF, it's not the skills or the game that matters... It's all about TV ratings and the 'excitement' of the game... Somehow sports becomes somewhat of an entertainment circle nowadays...

Since when was sport not entertainment? *Refers to old roman yesteryears with gladiators and lions...* If no one watches badminton, there wouldn't be a "pro tour kinda circuit" as these elite players won't get a stage to perform on and they wouldn't get paid...

**psychict** · 06-26-2006, 09:54 PM

okayy... if you put it that way

**viver** · 06-26-2006, 11:01 PM

Haven't been able to watch the match yet. Waiting for a chance to dl it.

Did you have a chance to watch the game? Was Lin Dan using more overhead or underarm attack shots?

Originally Posted by Loh

What Lee Chong Wei said when he lost in the rubber game against Lin Dan at the Yonex Chinese Taipei Open 2006" as reported todqy in IBF News.

Quote

Unlike in Malaysia where Lin refused the traditional celebrations of the Kuching medal ceremony, this time, he threw his bouquet to the crowd and invited Lee (Chong Wei) to join him on the podium. Lee, accepting his fate in the spirit of sportsmanship, said, “I was planning to play Lin Dan at the net but he was attacking so much that I got very tired towards the end of the match.”

Unquote