User Tag List

Page 9 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 ... LastLast
Results 137 to 153 of 449
  1. #137
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,747
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Initiative or no-initiative is just a description of the situation when the player is hitting the shuttle.

    A player in a 'with initiative' position have a choice to attack or play a less aggressive shot. On the other end, a player in a 'no initiative' situation does not have attacking options, either play a safe shot or try to surprise the opponent with an unexpected placement - which is similar when serving.

    In 21x3 games, matches are shorter and players can play a high pace game through the match. Can watch the game between Bao and Gade in SO. Gade attacked everything and played in a very high pace. Wonder if PG could maintain the same pace in a 15x3 system.

    Is it better to attack in a 21x3 system? Badminton is an attacking game, whether in 21x3 or 15x3. In my opinion, 15x3 allows you more varieties of play when compared to 21x3. Shorter games allows players to play mostly in a single pace - no gears change is necessary.


    Quote Originally Posted by chris@ccc
    Hi jerby,

    I agree with you. May be "initiative" is a better word.

    But I was assuming that when we talk about taking the "initiative", we are talking about taking the "initiative to start to attack"... and to me, taking the the initiative to attack is actually the start of the attack.

    Cheers... chris@ccc

  2. #138
    Regular Member chris-ccc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    26,548
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default kwun is right. Let us compare to FIFA Germany 2006

    Quote Originally Posted by kwun
    the question was:

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

    so is your answer "yes" or "no"?
    Hi Everyone,

    As kwun reminded us, the Question is "21 rally-point scoring system: Is it really better to Attack?". This is the essence of the question.

    Under the NSS, the side that attacks and fails loses a point.

    Because we are of different skill levels, it might be difficult to comment generally. I, as an experienced and skilled player, can keep lifting the shuttle(defensively) for my less experienced and weaker opponent to smash. He is attacking and I am defending, but I know I can do better and win the match.

    May be, if I can throw in a different scenario, you might appreciate what I am trying to say.

    Since most of us are all watching FIFA World Cup at the moment, I will use a FIFA scenario.

    If team A allows the team B to have a shot at goal(on purpose, tactically), and if team B fails to get the ball into the goal mouth, then team A is awarded a point(a goal)... this is what the NSS is about.

    I hope you know what I mean now. It might not be really better to Attack under the NSS.

    This is a question of tactics between 2 equally skilled opponents playing each other.


    Cheers... chris@ccc

  3. #139
    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 viver
    Is it better to attack in a 21x3 system? Badminton is an attacking game, whether in 21x3 or 15x3. In my opinion, 15x3 allows you more varieties of play when compared to 21x3. Shorter games allows players to play mostly in a single pace - no gears change is necessary.
    it's like drag racing vs indy 500, it depends. Both are exciting depending who are the audience.

  4. #140
    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 chris@ccc
    Hi Everyone,

    As kwun reminded us, the Question is "21 rally-point scoring system: Is it really better to Attack?". This is the essence of the question.

    Under the NSS, the side that attacks and fails loses a point.

    Because we are of different skill levels, it might be difficult to comment generally. I, as an experienced and skilled player, can keep lifting the shuttle(defensively) for my less experienced and weaker opponent to smash. He is attacking and I am defending, but I know I can do better and win the match.

    May be, if I can throw in a different scenario, you might appreciate what I am trying to say.

    Since most of us are all watching FIFA World Cup at the moment, I will use a FIFA scenario.

    If team A allows the team B to have a shot at goal(on purpose, tactically), and if team B fails to get the ball into the goal mouth, then team A is awarded a point(a goal)... this is what the NSS is about.

    I hope you know what I mean now. It might not be really better to Attack under the NSS.

    This is a question of tactics between 2 equally skilled opponents playing each other.


    Cheers... chris@ccc
    to add, attacking does not guarantee you points if ur opponents can compensate your offensive tactic.

  5. #141
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,747
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    You can use Liem Swie King vs Morten Frost or Han Jian games to answer your questions. Usually if the match goes to 3rd game Liem loses. Watch what happened in the first 2 games and make your own conclusion.

    PG games in AE, SO, he kept attacking at almost anything that came to his side of court. He smashed and was so fast to attack at the net. Would he be able to keep this high energy and pace in a 15x3 match?

    Therefore, in my opinion 'really better to Attack under the NSS' is not a question. We can go back on history, the changes to badminton technical and tactical point of view from the 60's, attack was always first in their mind. This did not change much until today and will not change with the 21x3 system. What remains to be seen is, when the real 21x3 players emerge, how will they play the attack.

    Shorter games will benefit players that are fast and strong, not necessarily the more skilled ones. Since 21x3 could be much shorter in terms of duration, a less skilled player has a much better change to beat a much better player relying only on speed and power.

    If history serves as a lesson, go watch how the Chinese players played in early 90's - maybe the early Dong Jiong, Sun Jun, Luo Yigang, etc. I may be wrong, but I believe it would give us an idea of what to come.

    Regards,


    Quote Originally Posted by chris@ccc
    Hi Everyone,

    I hope you know what I mean now. It might not be really better to Attack under the NSS.

    This is a question of tactics between 2 equally skilled opponents playing each other.


    Cheers... chris@ccc

  6. #142
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    France
    Posts
    146
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    See if I could add more to what have been said by Viver and cooler.

    In any game, you always “attack” the weakness of your opponent, likewise your opponent will “attack” your weakness.

    The bottom line is you always “attack” regardless if it is the 3x15 or the 3x21.

    At the professional level, what has been saying 1) When to attack; Cooler mentioned Taufik will tire his opponents and then go for the kill at the later part of the game. I saw Lin Dan and Lee Chong Wei had been using the same strategy; Cat and Mouse.2) The 3X15 allowing the Cat and Mouse strategy, as the cat could toy with the mouse for infinite if necessary, however with the 3X21 the cat has lost this “infinite” factor, and the mouse will be no longer tired and will bite the cat instead! 3)Viver and others including myself do believe that the new strategy to win the 3X21 is the strategy that is used by Peter Gade and the new generation of players will be primary focusing on certain strokes like net play and smash that will give them high returns –I sincerely hope we are wrong here!

  7. #143
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    NA
    Posts
    43
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kwun
    the question was:

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

    so is your answer "yes" or "no"?
    If you don't want to listen to others opinions, then please set a poll instead.

  8. #144
    Regular Member chris-ccc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    26,548
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Shot is not = stroke

    Quote Originally Posted by Chai
    You could twist the fact ....but

    For me; Shots = Strokes (example forehand low serve); and technically we classified the shots based on their usage in the rally.

    By the way, do you teach your children how to attack the service too ? would you teach them to deploy underarm shots (low serve or high serve strokes) as one of the options of attacking the service? It will be a good fun game of seeing who can lift the shuttle higher and further!

    We have been debated, at length, that when you serve; the rule restricts you to lift the shuttle upward and not downward thus giving the receiver the slight upperhand in dictating the rally; and most receiver has many options of "attacking" shots to choose to inflict the damage on the receiver.
    Hi Chai,

    To me a shot is not = stroke.

    If I mention to you about "your stroke", I would be referring to "the transfer of your weight, your body movement, your arm action, your grip, your racket swing, etc,...". In other words, how you are hitting the shuttle.

    But if I mention to you about "your shot", I would be referring to "the trajectory of the flight of the shuttle that you have hit, starting from the point of impact from the strings of your racket, over the net to your opponent's side".

    When I teach my younger children(say age 6) to do an Overhead Clear(the stroke), they usually do the Overhead Dropshot(the shot). I hope you can see what I am trying to say here... because they do not have enough power(because they are younger and weaker), their stroke production for the Overhead Clear resulted in a Overhead Dropshot.

    I laugh at them. And they laugh with me too.

    But they and I know... as they grow bigger and stronger, their Overhead Clear stroke will eventually produce the Overhead Clear shot.

    When I coach older children(say age 12) to do a Return of Service, I would teach them how to attack a service. I would teach him/her how to do a shot that could do harm(disadvantage or damage) to the server. I would teach him/her how to move his/her opponent away from the “base position”, for example.

    But when I coach International players, I would suggest more other ways to achieve it, not necessarily by forceful and powerful stroke, but with gentle strokes as well.

    Cheers... chris@ccc



  9. #145
    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

    Blurred.....

  10. #146
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Hong Kong
    Posts
    6,527
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think it is still too early to say if it is better to attack playing the NSS. Different countries will try their very best to fully exploit to their advantage under the NSS, just like the early and pioneering Chinese who introduced the speed and power dimensions into the game. In every game you need technique, fitness, tactics, and your brain. It will be your brain which will eventually choose the best combination of the other three, and as always such a combination will be adaptable to the type of opponent you will face.

  11. #147
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,747
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Since you coach international players, you surely have prepared them for this 21x3 system. Care to share your training methodology under the 21x3 system.


    Quote Originally Posted by chris@ccc

    But when I coach International players, I would suggest more other ways to achieve it, not necessarily by forceful and powerful stroke, but with gentle strokes as well.

    Cheers... chris@ccc



  12. #148
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    France
    Posts
    146
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chris@ccc
    Hi Chai,

    To me a shot is not = stroke.

    If I mention to you about "your stroke", I would be referring to "the transfer of your weight, your body movement, your arm action, your grip, your racket swing, etc,...". In other words, how you are hitting the shuttle.

    But if I mention to you about "your shot", I would be referring to "the trajectory of the flight of the shuttle that you have hit, starting from the point of impact from the strings of your racket, over the net to your opponent's side".

    When I teach my younger children(say age 6) to do an Overhead Clear(the stroke), they usually do the Overhead Dropshot(the shot). I hope you can see what I am trying to say here... because they do not have enough power(because they are younger and weaker), their stroke production for the Overhead Clear resulted in a Overhead Dropshot.

    I laugh at them. And they laugh with me too.

    But they and I know... as they grow bigger and stronger, their Overhead Clear stroke will eventually produce the Overhead Clear shot.

    When I coach older children(say age 12) to do a Return of Service, I would teach them how to attack a service. I would teach him/her how to do a shot that could do harm(disadvantage or damage) to the server. I would teach him/her how to move his/her opponent away from the “base position”, for example.

    But when I coach International players, I would suggest more other ways to achieve it, not necessarily by forceful and powerful stroke, but with gentle strokes as well.

    Cheers... chris@ccc


    Good for you.

    When you teach the "attacking" clear stroke, do you tell them how to transfer their body weight? and the angle of the racket face when it hits the shuttlecock? Do you tell them that never hit the shuttlecock up into the air ? Do you tell them when and where to use the stroke? Well we do thing differently then for sure.

    I wonder if I should use the term stroke cycle, with start position, travelling phase, stroke-move, recovery phase and new court position, but that is English coaching terminology(surely Jack Downey will be impressed!)

  13. #149
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    France
    Posts
    146
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Sorry, my last post has got nothing to do with the question of "Is it really better to attack?"

  14. #150
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    France
    Posts
    146
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by taneepak
    I think it is still too early to say if it is better to attack playing the NSS. Different countries will try their very best to fully exploit to their advantage under the NSS, just like the early and pioneering Chinese who introduced the speed and power dimensions into the game. In every game you need technique, fitness, tactics, and your brain. It will be your brain which will eventually choose the best combination of the other three, and as always such a combination will be adaptable to the type of opponent you will face.
    I suppose you do not agree with the view of Viver, cooler and myself regarding it is always good and "essential" to attack in Badminton regardless if it is the 3X15 or the 3X21?

    I wonder if you could share your thoughts on what type of tactic and strategy is good to play badminton.

  15. #151
    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 Chai
    See if I could add more to what have been said by Viver and cooler.

    In any game, you always “attack” the weakness of your opponent, likewise your opponent will “attack” your weakness.

    The bottom line is you always “attack” regardless if it is the 3x15 or the 3x21.

    At the professional level, what has been saying 1) When to attack; Cooler mentioned Taufik will tire his opponents and then go for the kill at the later part of the game. I saw Lin Dan and Lee Chong Wei had been using the same strategy; Cat and Mouse.2) The 3X15 allowing the Cat and Mouse strategy, as the cat could toy with the mouse for infinite if necessary, however with the 3X21 the cat has lost this “infinite” factor, and the mouse will be no longer tired and will bite the cat instead! 3)Viver and others including myself do believe that the new strategy to win the 3X21 is the strategy that is used by Peter Gade and the new generation of players will be primary focusing on certain strokes like net play and smash that will give them high returns –I sincerely hope we are wrong here!
    *sigh*, not exactly what i meant.
    1. i said taufik is a slow starter, this does not equates to tiring his opponents purposely from the start. To tire out your opponents, it will COST U ENERGY AS WELL. If it is that simple to do like what u say, I like to tire my opponents ALL THE TIME. I do not think taufik is an endurance player, so imo your logic is flawed. What and why taufik do what he does i'll leave u to figure it out. Just watch some of his video and u should know.

    3. net play and smash works very well under OSS too, taufik, like u and taneepak said, use it all the time under OSS. If this work even better in NSS, then why taufik hated the NSS so much?? your logic don't drive.
    Last edited by cooler; 06-16-2006 at 02:19 AM.

  16. #152
    Regular Member Loh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Singapore Also Can
    Posts
    11,628
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Thank you Chris for your illuminations and others too for your expositions.
    Your ability to galvanize our thoughts and summarize them into an organized whole deserves our congratulations! I certainly have learned something from this discussion.

  17. #153
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Basement Boiler Room
    Posts
    22,118
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default what happened here, did spitko attack more than baht?

    Quote Originally Posted by chris@ccc
    http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus...0606151801.htm

    Below, I have made an extract from the above link.

    ===start extract===

    New Delhi, June 15. (PTI): Unfancied Arvind Bhat today pulled off a sensational straight-game victory against world number six Kenneth Jonassen of Denmark to storm into the prequarterfinals of the men's singles in Malaysian Open badminton championship.

    The mechanical engineer from Bangalore showed scant respect for the reputation of his opponent, thrashing the fifth seed 21-16, 23-21 to set up a clash with Roman Spitko of Germany in the four-star event in Kuching.

    ................

    World no. 61 Bhat, regarded as a talent to reckon with but prone to choking in crunch moments, played a fiercely attacking game and did not allow Jonassen to play his rallies in the first game.

    Stung by the reverse in the first game, Jonassen, who had defeated India's Anup Sridhar in Indonesian Open last week in the quarterfinals, came back hard in the second but Bhat was determined not to let slip the opportunity from his hand.

    The 25-year-old surprised Jonassen with some deceptive shots and although Jonassen stretched the game to 21, Bhat had the last laugh.

    ===end extract===

    Don't know if I have read it correctly... Bhat attacked with deceptive shots, not just with power shots.

    Can anyone watching at courtside report/make confirmation on this?

    Cheers... chris@ccc

    ---------------------------

    Badminton: Bhat bows out of Malaysian Open
    New Delhi, June 15: Arvind Bhat's irresistable form eluded him against Roman Spitko of Germany as the Indian lost in straight games in a pre-quarterfinal tie to bow out of the four-star Malaysian Open badminton tournament in Kuching tonight.

    Bhat, who caused a major upset earlier in the day toppling world No.6 Kenneth Jonassen of Denmark, failed to make his giantkilling act count, going down 14-21 17-21 to the German.

    Spitko, whose win against Bhat also avenged his defeat at the hands of the Indian in the Thoams Cup in April, will meet Lee Hyun II of Korea in the quarterfinal.

    In the men's doubles, Rupesh Kumar and Thomas Sanave beat Malaysia's Yung Jin and Abdul Rahman Rafiz 21-17 21-19 to move into the quarterfinals, where they will meet another Malaysian pair of Lin Won Fui and Mohd Fairuzizian.

    World no. 61 Bhat, regarded as a talent to reckon with but prone to choking in crunch moments, played a fiercely attacking game to cost for Jonassen.

    The mechanical engineer from Bangalore showed scant respect for the reputation of his opponent, thrashing the fifth seed 21-16 23-21 to set up a clash with Spitko.

Page 9 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 ... 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
  •