I was looking for information on badminton v tennis and look what I found, I was amazed when I read it! http://www.badminton.bnl.gov/ten-bad.html For those of you too lazy to click on the link, I will just paste it below ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Statistics don't lie. The speed and the stamina required for badminton are far greater than for any other racket sport. At the 1985 All England (Tennis) Championships, Boris Becker defeated Kevin Curren 6-3, 6-7, 7-6, 6-4. At the 1985 World Badminton Championships in Calgary, Canada, Han Jian of China defeated Morten Frost of Denmark, 14-18, 15-10, 15-8. The following is a statistical comparison of those matches. Tennis: Time: 3 hrs & 18 mins Ball/Shuttle in Play: 18 mins Match Intensity*: 9 percent Rallies: 299 Shots: 1,004 Shots Per Rally: 3.4 Distance Covered: 2 miles Badminton: Time: 1 hr & 16 mins Ball/Shuttle in Play: 37 mins Match Intensity*: 48 percent Rallies: 146 Shots: 1,972 Shots Per Rally: 3.5 Distance Covered: 4 miles * The actual time the ball/shuttle was in flight, divided by the length of the match. Note that the badminton players competed for half the time, yet ran twice as far and hit nearly twice as many shots. -------------------------------------------------------------------------
honestly i'm a fan of badminton to the end, and theres no way i'd ever think tennis comes close. both sports, as mentioned, has evolved in many ways, for the better. but tennis has probably got a lot faster over this period of time than badminton has, and even then, badminton nowadays is no way anywehre close to mild. but seriously, theres no reason to compare the two. its just silly. every sport has their way of taxing the athlete. even golf, billiards, or any other sport.
It's a retaliatory move... against the perception in North America that tennis is a sports, but badminton is not. In Asia, no one would bother doing such a comparison.
Personally I prefer badminton, but yes, like what others said, I don't think its right to compare the 2. Tennis has its own complexities like the number of grips and strokes u can impart on the ball. Comparing the 2 is comparing an apple and orange.
Nah, it's more like pears & oranges! Very true for both sports. Not true. Tennis has much longer rallies than it did 15-25 yrs ago, especially in men's tennis. Since the mid-to-late '90s, the tennis ball has become brighter. Specifically, check out the Slazenger ball used at Wimbledon these days -- probably the brightest ball ever. Most fast courts have also been slowed down since the '90s -- even the grass at Winbledon is cut differently and uses a different variety of grass to make it slower. The composition of harcourts has been altered in many cases to slow it down. Many of the indoor surfaces are also slower on the average. If I had to guess, I'd say that men's tennis might be more like 15-20% "Match Intensity" with women's tennis somewhat higher. This is still lower than badminton, which is close to 40-50%. However, the difference in duration offsets this intensity -- tennis matches are often 2.5 to 3x longer which adds another element of stamina. To say that one sport, or the other, is more of an athletic challenge is ludicrous.
I have seen this article before. But honestly Tennis is a different game than badminton. Please don't start to make this thread where one sport is "better" than another. Dear Moderators.... if this thread starts to become like that please shut this thread down. Tennis is a wonderful game that is successful. It is not what I enjoy participating at, but Tennis players have worked hard to develop skills specific to Tennis. Just like Badminton players have to develop skills specific to Badminton. Lets try to make badminton more successful on its own, and not by putting other sports down. Take care All! Toddster
I think the problem is usually the opposite, that lovers of other sports put down badminton, simply because they don't understand that it requires an extreme amount of explosive strenght, agility, stamina and speed. They think it is easy just because the shuttle is light and tha court is smaller than a Tennsi Court for example Saying that badminton is more demanding than Tennis, isn't really putting tennis down imop. Just like I can say I feel Tennis is more physically demanding than darts.. (That is not putting down dart.. Being a Champ in darts requires as much training as being Champ in Tennis or badminton..).. But its just simply not that exhasuting to play darts for 3 hours than Tennis for 3 Hours.. And playing badminton for 3 hours is certainly more exhausting for the body than 3 hours of tennis..(given that both games are played by good players) /Twobeer
can't really compare distance coverage in relation to length of the game if thats the case.. then ppl can make the same compare with 100M where it takes 10 second to finish
Well, If you ran 100m on the same time as someone else running 400m ..wouldnt you say the athlete running the 400m in the same time would probably be fitter/quicker /Twobeer
thats the exact part that i believe people are taking it the wrong way the key for the 100m runner is to release all his energy WITHIN that given 10 second, u can not assume since this 100m runner can do 100m in 10 second THEN he should be able to do 400m in 40 second its not the same thing how you distrubte your speed and energy output when given a different task, the type and amount of training you do when preparing a sport that can last 3 hour then a sport that last 1 hour should be very differnt there is no way you can "FAIRLY" compare different sports in terms of fittness.. how do you compare a world class 100m runner and a marathon runner? wouldn't you agree they are both extememly fit and their sport are both extremely demanding? but truth is they are fit in a their own way and u can't just compare the 2 and say which game is more demanding
I agree in general. but in this particualt case I think it is fair to say that running 4 mile in one hour is more demanding than running 2 miles in 3 hours.. If there where obivously quicker runing during the 2 miles then i could be a fair point.. but the ball in play in the figures indicate that the running speed was very similiar.. And we also know that jumps etc are more taxing, than "sliding" Yes, I agree! And I also agree that it is very easy to compare apples and oranges when comparing different sports!! I still think you can compare to a certain degree.. For example I think you would agree that you could compare darts and Tennis, and agree that Tennis is more physically demanding. By the same not I think It is fair to say that Badminton is more physically deamnding than Tennis.. Howeer I would not think it would be easy to say that badminton is more physical deamnding than for example 100m dash.. (then it becomes to much of an apples/oranges issue).. /Twobeer
Cover meaning: Able to go from side to side.....and front to back ETC, whereas in tennis....they always stand at the back. Reason: cause it gives them more time to get side to side.... hence they don't cover 3/4 the court(front and middle and slight back)
