Results 18 to 34 of 81
09-30-2006, 10:26 AM #18Originally Posted by yuval_ba
For an amateur like me, I only play with my friends, and there are 0 serve fault calls and line judging's done somewhat fairly by ourselves, not to mention we have almost no pressure whatsoever during the game, so I guess even after I tried it I wouldn't know how it's like for the pros
Hey...is there a poll for this? Just interested in graphicals, cuz I hate reading...
09-30-2006, 01:32 PM #19Originally Posted by yuval_ba
09-30-2006, 01:50 PM #20Originally Posted by yuval_ba
the main difference between rally scoring and side-out scoring is the urgency by which you need to recover from your own error. in side-out scoring you get 2 tries to regain the serve. you were not penalized for losing it, but you are not rewarded for regaining it either. the importance of making the serve, especially on game point, is minimized. for that reason, i like rally scoring better.
i propose extending the winning score to 30, for a 3x30 rally scoring format, with a cap of 35. it gives the better player an opportunity for a comeback, without allowing the game to theoretically last forever.
09-30-2006, 02:04 PM #21Originally Posted by samkool
It seems like badminton's starting to follow along some other sports on this matter...volleyball's scoring system evolved to that of the rally point system about 5 years ago, and table tennis has always used rally points, up to 21 points. I still remember playing pro table tennis, and maybe it was just me, but the pressure at the end's more like "I'm not going to take this back" rather than "If I get this serve back, I have a chance", which is one thing I really liked about badminton...
Last edited by Aozora; 09-30-2006 at 02:06 PM.
09-30-2006, 02:26 PM #22Originally Posted by Aozora
oh wait, that was two words
Originally Posted by Aozora
09-30-2006, 02:44 PM #23
Blah, I don't get those couch potatoes...if you actually want to watch something, it shouldn't matter how long it is T_T It's sad that in this world we have to change a sport to the audience's liking and not the player's, affecting the gameplay of it =/ Oh well...all bout the audience...
Maybe one day we will have badminton similar to the WWE... >_>
09-30-2006, 04:01 PM #24Originally Posted by Aozora
first of all what TV coverage they are talking about ??? badminton is not covered on any TV I know of outside Asia, you will get backgammon WC before you will get badminton on TV
second, sport gets popular not by making itself fit TV scheduals for sure. is Tennis covenient for TV broadcasting ??? match can variate from 1.5h to 5h, is this called predicatable ?, not to mention rain delays. I actually got more air time of watching the rain during the last US Open than time watching badminton on TV ever
I know I am not the first to point this out but that the truth.
There must be other ways to promote badminton than change the scoring system and ruin the sport.
09-30-2006, 04:24 PM #25Originally Posted by yuval_ba
Originally Posted by yuval_ba
Originally Posted by yuval_ba
the usa likes tennis, usa companies like tennis so usa companies will sponsor tennis, so tennis gets tv coverage.
badminton will have to make the sport likable/watchable to usa companies in order to get their $ponsorship. appeal to the potential sponsors to get $. we may not like it, but that's the way it is.
hell, what's the appeal of golf? it appeals to the people/companies with $.
09-30-2006, 05:47 PM #26
I believe ill ending up adapting as usual...Originally Posted by [BOriginally Posted by kemana
As with Aozora I completely agree with him and am still waiting to know why the 15 point system was changed, and have they ever provided a valid reasoning and did they realize the games are actually completing early and they might be actually loosing people interested in watching these games.
Originally Posted by kemana
The unforced errors will not give the player a chance to come back and already existing problems such as line calls and judgements, will add more pressure on the player.. oh dont forget the special effects of the stadium inlcuding the breeze or air drift...
My final question or request again and again... Cant we do anything against this?? Atleast have the IBF themselves had a look back on the rally system at all?? I am sure Peter Gade will now change from his previous pro 21 point rally system stance.
I believe ill end up adapting as usual...
10-01-2006, 01:33 AM #27
It's really too bad that many Americans don't watch, or hardly even know about, badminton...it's a great sport, more physically intensive than soccer, fastest projectile sport in existance (unless you count hunting perhaps), and it's also great as a fun game. Not to mention, the US actually have good players like Tony Gunawan from Indonesia...It is unfortunate that in the North American society many people seem to prefer contact sports like football (er, the hand one), hockey, and wrestling (I still don't consider that a sport...=/).
We have many people in Asia that love badminton, but they don't have the money that IBF seems to be after. However, I actually can't imagine Americans liking the sport more just because we change the scoring system. For one thing most of them would never know there ever was a change, and then the ones that do hear of it from somewhere won't care too much. Finally, going after money certainly does make IBF have a even worse image than it already did.
10-01-2006, 02:14 AM #28
Funny... when the point system was changed, many people (include myself) thought this is the end of china's dominance and a chance for weaker BM countries.
Life is full of surprise
10-01-2006, 03:18 AM #29Originally Posted by BMcentral
10-01-2006, 03:28 AM #30Originally Posted by Aozora
if you told me there are really some companies that will sponser and promote badminton if it only had rally point scoring system and "predictable" match duration, then I will be the first to welcome it.
I don't beleive it's the case
10-01-2006, 06:02 AM #31
Rally point system has its merits, as been said enough. i'm not against it. however, what i'm not sure is if it has to be 21x3. 21x5 looks like a better solution.
if you study the after-match statistics, you might be surprised like me by the fact that in many matches the winner and the loser are only seperated by less than 5 total rallies won. the difference was only 1 rally/point in a match i watched! games like this are too tight to tell. why isn't there in the world a champion for 10 m short running? because it's impossible to tell who's the best short runner in 10 meters and you gotta let them run 100m!
the current 21x3 NSS sometimes looks like a 10 meter short running.
10-01-2006, 07:46 AM #32Originally Posted by BMcentral
10-01-2006, 07:50 AM #33Originally Posted by taneepak
10-01-2006, 08:07 AM #34
Under the NSS every point is critical. This is why close line calls are not only challenged by the aggrieved players, the players who are awarded the points also complain to the umpire about the behaviour of the aggrieved players for grand standing, time-wasting, and disruption to their winning streak, etc, etc. Under the OSS close line calls were also questioned but without the passion and fight we find in the NSS. OSS bred better manners, NSS is a "fight to the death" in which manners have no place. Badminton under the NSS has become less gentlemanly but more competitive in more ways than we thought.
By chris-ccc in forum Techniques / TrainingReplies: 448: 11-24-2011, 08:16 AM
By maximR in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / OfficiatingReplies: 5: 01-20-2011, 04:36 PM
By Break-My-String in forum Coaching ForumReplies: 0: 11-08-2006, 05:47 AM
By MikeJ in forum Jonas Rasmussen ForumReplies: 21: 06-05-2006, 06:03 AM
By ants in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / OfficiatingReplies: 50: 04-26-2006, 04:40 PM