User Tag List

Page 27 of 27 FirstFirst ... 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27
Results 443 to 449 of 449
  1. #443
    Moderator Oldhand's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Asia
    Posts
    7,328
    Mentioned
    11 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Winning requires a combination of attack and defence.

    To say that 'attack always wins' is to stretch the point.

    A team that relies purely on attack dies swiftly if denied the chance to attack.
    Similarly, attacking when an attack is not warranted is the easiest way to lose the point. (Two recent examples are the 2008 Swiss Open MD Final and the 2008 India Open XD Final.) Simply put, defensive play can be very lethal against a poorly set-up attack -- the term 'offensive defence' might be an oxymoron, but it would surely be an apt description here.

    The great doubles teams have been equally adept at attack and defence.
    What's prized is the ability to opportunistically switch between the two - and therein lies the key to success.

    We could have a similar argument for singles play but Lin Dan's overlordship in the time of Lee Chong Wei and Taufik Hidayat aids the "attack-is-better" position

  2. #444
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Ipoh
    Posts
    1,161
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by franxon View Post
    from my point of view the new scoring system (NSS) doesn't really encourage more attacks as a better game strategy. it only shortens the game and therefore saves players' stemina, and when players have more energy per minute to use, they attack.

    however, different players always have different approaches to win their games. after all, in most cases, a game in the new scoring system, if converted to the old scoring system (OSS), is just the first few points of the game. therefore, the question "how to win a game in the NSS" can be translated into "how to win the first few points, or how to establish the advantage in the first few points in the OSS", with the only difference being it is a MUST now in the NSS while the "advantage in the OSS" isn't.

    in the OSS, an advantage is just an advantage, it does not necessarily develop into a victory. we've seen too many "come back" games. however, in the NSS, this used-to-be advantage now means a victory. so for those who get into the game slowly this is an disadvantage, but for those who don't attack, maybe not: did players who establish an advantage earlier in a game (OSS) always achieve it by attacks?

    what the NSS really changes this game, from my point of view, might be:

    1. Men's games are shorter, players' stemina is still a restriction, but less so now.

    2. every point counts. so players play more carefully: if you don't get this point, your opponent does. this might be good, as loved by tennis and table tennis players.

    3. deuce. in tennis when the score reaches 40-40, it comes to a deuce, he who first gets a point from "advantage" wins the game. this does introduce more unpredictability into badminton. however, badminton shouldn't set a limit to 30, or he who reaches 30 first takes the game. it should be all like tennis: unlimited.

    4. from my observation, women's singles did not become shorter from 11 points (OSS) to 21 points (NSS) during the Uber Cup. but Xie Xingfang would disagree. :-D

    i personally like the "every point counts" part of the new scoring system, and best of 3 is suitable for most non-professional players. but for professionals, it could be better set to best of 5 games, without a cap of 30 points.
    I generally agree point 1,2 & 4. The 30point cap was set to put in more 'oomph' for players to get there first should the game be dragged unnecessarily long and to keep spectators at the edge of their seats.

    As for the sport of badminton, I don't deny that stamina is required as that of tennis but even though the size of a tennis court is much bigger, don't forget that the speed and reflex required in the game of badminton is much more crucial as the shuttle reaches its destination faster than a tennis ball because the court is smaller. Same goes for ping pong, don't think that because the table size is so much smaller than a tennis court, it therefore requires less speed and stamina. In fact, it is vice versa because in momentum terms, a sudden short spurt of speed requires more power just like when you floor down your car's gas pedal. In in reality, these movements tires out and wears you down faster than when you run at a gradual constant speed. So putting the requirement to best of 5 games for professional is easier said than done in 21 point scoring system.

  3. #445
    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)

    Arrow A NSS Singles game will last about 20 minutes (most of the time)

    Quote Originally Posted by Pakito View Post
    I generally agree point 1,2 & 4. The 30point cap was set to put in more 'oomph' for players to get there first should the game be dragged unnecessarily long and to keep spectators at the edge of their seats.

    As for the sport of badminton, I don't deny that stamina is required as that of tennis but even though the size of a tennis court is much bigger, don't forget that the speed and reflex required in the game of badminton is much more crucial as the shuttle reaches its destination faster than a tennis ball because the court is smaller. Same goes for ping pong, don't think that because the table size is so much smaller than a tennis court, it therefore requires less speed and stamina. In fact, it is vice versa because in momentum terms, a sudden short spurt of speed requires more power just like when you floor down your car's gas pedal. In in reality, these movements tires out and wears you down faster than when you run at a gradual constant speed. So putting the requirement to best of 5 games for professional is easier said than done in 21 point scoring system.
    .
    We have now found that a NSS Singles game will last about 20 minutes (most of the time).

    Therefore, if a Singles match is to go into the 3rd game, the match would probably finish in around 60 minutes (plus/minus 10 minutes).

    If the match was to be the best of 5 games, and the match is played to the 5th game, then the match would probably finish in around 100 minutes (which is almost the same length of a normal movie show).
    .
    Last edited by chris-ccc; 05-18-2011 at 06:24 PM.

  4. #446
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Ipoh
    Posts
    1,161
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    It's amazing how I found threads ranging as early as 2005 of how BCERs over here vehemently discredits the 21 point system whereas now, it's so normal and cool to watch the game in such quick explosive manner and within a short period of time you get to see the best of what players have to offer on court, or the lack of it.

  5. #447
    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)

    Thumbs up There are also many other things good about the NSS

    Quote Originally Posted by Pakito View Post
    It's amazing how I found threads ranging as early as 2005 of how BCERs over here vehemently discredits the 21 point system whereas now, it's so normal and cool to watch the game in such quick explosive manner and within a short period of time you get to see the best of what players have to offer on court, or the lack of it.
    .
    One of the things I like about the NSS (New Scoring System) is that our professional players are now able to play to older age.

    There are also many other things good about the NSS. That's why the NSS remains with us.
    .

  6. #448
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    sydney
    Posts
    102
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The nature of the game has changed over the years and the NSS may have been the catalyst in how the game has been shaped.

    In the olden days, single players play the classic style of serving high and as far as the service line. You just wait for the opponent to drop, clear or smash. If your opponent can win a smash from your serve, he still has to serve to win the point.

    These days, single players are taught to serve low because of the advantages of forcing your opponent to net or lift. You want to attack first. In the olden days under the OSS, you can elect to play a defensive or attacking game. It is like a game of chess. These days it's all attacking game and
    Have you seen a high lob these days in professional championship? Almost never…. as it is too slow.
    Under the OSS, a doubles team can still win with a strong defence. The Sidek brothers in the 1990s had such strong defence that they can lift and lift all day just to get their opponent to smash into trouble.
    Today, you can watch four players smashing in a match because with one serve in doubles it is crucial to win at all cost. No need to defend…. Just attack.
    I have the privilege to watch good players in action in the past and now and certainly it has been a joy to watch the older version of badminton under the OSS. Yes… the game may be slower but it’s still a game of skill and hard work. Today’s NSS will never see Liem Siew King come back 1-14 to win the third set in a world championship tournament ( because of the many saves he made in the service over under the OSS) or the Sidek brothers lifting20-30 shots to invite their opponents to smash.

    Today’s’ game that we see today is so much faster and more of an attacking game. Keeping it low is the name of the game and don’t lift to avoid being smashed at 230kph. The badminton game these days is like tennis today….. a faster game and NSS will facilitate it.

  7. #449
    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)

    Lightbulb Regarding a more attacking game ......

    Quote Originally Posted by permanis View Post
    The nature of the game has changed over the years and the NSS may have been the catalyst in how the game has been shaped.

    In the olden days, single players play the classic style of serving high and as far as the service line. You just wait for the opponent to drop, clear or smash. If your opponent can win a smash from your serve, he still has to serve to win the point.

    These days, single players are taught to serve low because of the advantages of forcing your opponent to net or lift. You want to attack first. In the olden days under the OSS, you can elect to play a defensive or attacking game. It is like a game of chess. These days it's all attacking game and
    Have you seen a high lob these days in professional championship? Almost never…. as it is too slow.
    Under the OSS, a doubles team can still win with a strong defence. The Sidek brothers in the 1990s had such strong defence that they can lift and lift all day just to get their opponent to smash into trouble.
    Today, you can watch four players smashing in a match because with one serve in doubles it is crucial to win at all cost. No need to defend…. Just attack.
    I have the privilege to watch good players in action in the past and now and certainly it has been a joy to watch the older version of badminton under the OSS. Yes… the game may be slower but it’s still a game of skill and hard work. Today’s NSS will never see Liem Siew King come back 1-14 to win the third set in a world championship tournament ( because of the many saves he made in the service over under the OSS) or the Sidek brothers lifting20-30 shots to invite their opponents to smash.

    Today’s’ game that we see today is so much faster and more of an attacking game. Keeping it low is the name of the game and don’t lift to avoid being smashed at 230kph. The badminton game these days is like tennis today….. a faster game and NSS will facilitate it.
    .
    Regarding a more attacking game, it's only when one can play with fewer mistakes.

    Perhaps, we go back to Post #7; From that post onwards, we received some interesting comments from some of our BCers.
    .

Page 27 of 27 FirstFirst ... 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27

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
  •