IBF proposed a 5 games, 7 points a game system. it was tested out in the recent junior world championship. 7 point a game is very short compared to 15.
IBF: is it format or presentation? i think IBF is fixing the wrong thing here. by changing the game to 7 points each, they forcefully made the game more aggressive. all players will start getting on the attack from point 0. sure, that may make the game faster, but that's only one great nature of the sport, but they completely eliminated the aspect of the sport, and that's mental power and endurance. an all attacking game of badminton is similar to just mindless violent. this will kill the dynamic nature of the pace. badminton is not only about being aggressive, it is about patience and will power too. if we have a 7 point games, legendary players like Han Jian, Xiong GuoBao, Sun Jun would not have surfaced. without a 15 point game, the epic battles between Camilla Martin and Dai Jun in the '99 Sudirman Cup and World Championship, and Sun Jun vs. Peter Rasmussen in the '97 World Championship would not have taken place, and there must be numerous other examples. the main reason that brought about this format change is the fact that TV broadcasts don't like games that unpredictably varies from 15mins to 1+ hours. but look at tennis, they have very long and unpredictable match too, but all networks in the US are airing them regularly. i think one of the main reason that badminton may not be as popular is that most audience are not familiar with the game. badminton fanatics like us watch the games with a lot of appreciation on how great the shots are, but to layman, they all look so easy (and don't blame the pros for making them look easy! and the biggest biggest problem is, the camera angles never really captures the speed and dynamics of the game. i have seen so many competition in which the broadcasts are hardly watchable. there are cases when the sound was very distant and muted, or not in sync with the visual. or simply wrong camera angle. i find that the audio quality is just as important as the visual. nothing is better than a thundering loud smash! the umpire also plays an important role in the game, and most of the time, i could hardly hear the umpire calling the shots. without good presentation techniques, it will be hard to capture the audience's attention, and without it, badminton will remain to be appreciated by a small lucky few. i remember in the 80s, the camera techniques was much better. furthermore, the quality of the commentator varies by a lot too. some are just purely clueless and never understood what's going on in the game. or mis-understood what happened in a rally. for experience players, they can tell right away what's going on, but for the people who are flipping channels, they really need some real explanation. the commentator never have the ability to engage the audience. some can do a better job, but most are pretty poor at it. sorry for the long message. it is frustrating how IBF is trying to rip the game apart purely because of commercial value.
RE: IBF: is it format or presentation? Commercial value is very important, the more money they make the popular the game will be. I am sick of seeing my batminton heroe who win a major tournament rake in $10,000 only and world long jump or any track and field even, the winner rake in $50,000 and not to memtion tennis player who rake in $500,000 or more. My theory is, the next Olympics game they should let the rich country like USA win the gold medal in badminton so there will be a huge media coverage, the biggest upset in badminton history. Once the American think they are good, there will be huge sponsorships, watch the money come in for badminton.
RE: IBF: is it format or presentation? Applause, well said kwun. IMO, a shortened game will change the whole tactics and the way badminton should be played. Many variables and techniques(finesse, deception, game plan, etc) will be ignored to replaced by raw power. While composing this message, an idea came to me that i think should satisfy IBF, TV network, and us badminton enthusists. Before i go into detail here (or embrass myself here) , i think i'll contact IBF first in case they might have something similar in mind.
RE: Being realistic. More to think about? Some sports have to change with the times. Cricket is a good example - they were forced to play more one day tests to try and keep the game more interesting. We should have longer breaks between the games for the advertisements. Ninety seconds between the 1st and 2nd game is just too short for adverts. For the spectators, have u ever tried going to the toilet and getting back to your seat in 90 secs? I suspect we would have higher quality games if the breaks were longer as well. One alternative would be to have a time out system. It's been introduced into table tennis and to me it doesn't distract from the game ('cos it's pretty short as well). I found the Olympic table tennis really exciting. But a time out period of 45 secs in a game of badminton would be pretty reasonable for the players to get a drink, rub off sweat, get a bit of advice from the coach and get a quick analysis from the commentator, replay a key point in slow motion or get an advert in. One big difference that badminton has from other sports is that play must be continuous. It is so difficult to isolate a particular slow motion sequence. Not many shots can be shown because the next point is already underway and the commentators can't comment on how the winning shot was set up. This leads to less explanation for the less informed viewer, who then cannot appreciate the shots and the physical and mental effort that is put in by players. There are numerous times when I thought "how did they do that?" or "how did they set up the winning shot?" but didn;t get a chance to learn how. Let's go back to the seven point game. Yes it is quite likely the whole game will speed up to just a smash, smash, smash, smash scenario. But it does give more opportunities for breaks between games. So how can we protect the defensive/retrieving game? Perhaps a nine or eleven point game is more appropriate if a point is given for a winning shot similar to tennis/table tennis/volleyball. It sure makes things easier for the uninitated to understand and enjoy the game with only a minor understanding of the rules. Five sets would be mandatory under this type of scoring system, in my opinion. Can the tie breaks be altered? I'm quite attracted by the idea of having the 5th game won by two clear points. Having the potential of every shot being a match point (in the final game) under our present system is pretty exciting but u know the game will end quickly. Winning by a 2 point margin rule would just prolong the game enough to still keep people interested and on the edge of their seats rather than them knowing the game will end less than five minutes later. Why not in the first four games as well? Hmm, the scores would then start to look wierd, e.g. 11-9, 8-10, 20-18(!).......what is the common spectator going to think? Probably be quite confused. Kwun has very good points on the TV presentation. Audio quality brings a very important dimension to the game. Especially as it is difficult to put the game on TV. I too, would like to hear better courtside sounds. As for the camera angles, having the main camera sighted directly on the midline of the court gives very little impression of the front back court coverage. Even a slightly angled from left or right of centre line would be better. I don;t know what the best angle is but I have no doubt this suggestion is an improvement.
RE: IBF: is it format or presentation? commercial value is important, but not at the expense of the game's inherent qualities. come to think about it, have anyone tried the 7 points game system yet? i am going to try it out this weekend. please try it out also, we can post our comments and then discuss.. i wonder what Taufik thinks, <i>Is Taufik reading any of this??</i>
RE: let us know!! kwun: Last week, I emailed to IBF's secretary expressing my desire to provide valid suggestion regarding the whole debate and potential implementation of the new 3/5 7 point system. Just to show i'm not deceiving this forum here is content of my email to lindseyb@intbadfed.org. -------------- Wednesday, November 22, 2000 12:05 AM Hello I think i have some advice or suggestion to pass onto Mr Jeff Robson and Mr. Punch Gunlan regarding the resolution of the much debated 7pointx 5 games scoring system. It would be appreciative if I can write to them directly via email of my view on this. My name is xxxx xxxx and i live in canada. For the last several years, badminton friends of mine, and in internet forums, debates go endlessly on the virtue of the new 7x5 versus the current ( or old ) 15x3 scoring system. Both system seem to have their merits but no one can agree totally on the new 7x5 system. As i'm seeing more and more high profile tournaments been scrapped due to lack of sponsorship, i see the need of immediate attention to address this dilemna. Badminton is, i think, 2nd most played sports in the world but still gets very little television coverage. I like to share some of suggestions to Mr. Robson and Mr. Gunlan if i could. I personally think i can please the loyal badminton players as well as the television networks. my personal email address is xxxxxxxxxxxx@home.com thanks for your attention xxxx xxxx ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- As of Dec 2, 2000, i haven't got back any reply yet. Maybe i sent to the wrong person or maybe they don't know how to reply to a Mr . Nobody. If the latter is true, then it doesnt look good for badminton as the IBF board are too narrowed mind and run by some old fodgy elistist (maybe too strong of words) and needed some new and younger blood in the board of directors. It is the strength and clout of IBF that could change the profile of badminton. They can reach government officials, network executives must easy than you and I. I ask you, how many people heard of IBF, they might as well guess it's International Basketball Federation or International Boxing Federation. I think Yonex did more to badminton than IBF history. Yonex continues to promote badminton although now day yonex makes much much more money from their tennis and golf equipments ( see, i dont bash yonex all the time). Well this is a long post catch u guys later
