Sport Psychology in Badminton

[Oldhand]

Congratulations on finishing your degree

So where's the grad party?

You're most welcome to celebrate it in our court.

I hope we get to play.

Here's my question: What's the best way to psych your opponent out?
What's the most effective way to distract you opponents without breaking the rules?

A few special methods:

You could be Cai Yun and wipe non-existent sweat off your face at least once after every point won or lost. Remember to use your non-racquet palm and flick the (non-existent) sweat beads in the general direction of the service judge.

You could be Taufik Hidayat and pretend to be more interested in what's going on elsewhere than on the court you are now playing on. Remember to point your racquet at invisible pools of sweat on your side of the court and get the umpire to signal the moppers to come in so that you get a longer break between hard-fought points.

You could be Chen Jin and walk around with a perennially grumpy and dour look as if you are supremely tired of being Chen Jin. Remember to prepare for a serve by staring at your opponent and then serve the shuttle abruptly and furiously. (Remember also to occasionally clutch your back whenever you are playing Lin Dan so that it doesn't look that bad when you finally give up the game.)

You could be Lee Chong Wei and pretend to look totally dejected and morose when winning handsomely. Remember to throw up your hands, whip your head back, raise your eyebrows at least six inches and let your jaw hang whenever the line-judge rules against you on a close call.

Well, you could also throw a racquet and be as effective, if not better, as any of these worthies

[venkatesh]

A few special methods:

You could be Cai Yun and wipe non-existent sweat off your face at least once after every point won or lost. Remember to use your non-racquet palm and flick the (non-existent) sweat beads in the general direction of the service judge....

Can I be like Lee Yong Dae and tap my racket to the umpire's chair?

[cooler]

Depends of course on the kid, if the kid wants to train more, good, if he decides to quit, the you got nothing to do with that. but as you have said, the kid loves to play, so taking that statement, i'll be talking from a standpoint in which the kid loves to play.

Actually that motivation is enough for him to keep on training, keep on playing and probably excel on the sport. It's just a matter of getting the right responses you want at the time, as i've said before, behavior can be controlled or manipulated with the use of the proper stimulus to create the needed response. It's just like training a dog how to swim, dogs are natural swimmers, but what you want them to do is to swim when you want them to. You do this by giving them food or a good belly rub after they swim. Same theory applies to humans, you must give rewards (in psychology we call it reinforcments) when certain responses are maid. For example, giving a simple "good job!" or a tap on the shoulder will do. Like when he grasps concepts he had learned from one on one training, capitalize on the proper response by giving good feedback. Its just a matter of finding the right reward, or reinforcement in each proper response that the kid gives. This way he'll be motivated to train even harder. Like "do ten backhand serves, do it correctly and i'll give you ten bucks". Always remember to just give rewards or reinforcments with good responses that are made, or else you will be reinforcing the wrong once. Never get mad at the kid or same thing happens, you'll be getting the wrong responses and it will be a never ending cycle.

hi, it's me again.
let continue where i had left off. After having some or most of the right genes for that particular task or role, external influence will shape that athlete. What you had described is democratic conditioning if u excuse my poor use of psychology wording. That process is slow and still may not get the result desired after exhausting all your resources. Veteran badminton countries like Canada, US, UK are some examples of this democratic conditioning as described above in your post. Canada, for ex, have good players but not great players. If that kid example use by break-my-string was in china, he will be plucked by a badminton scout and put into the 'china system'. The stimulus employed is a little different. If the subject student do bad, he'll get punished, not status quo. If he/she does good, the subject escape punishment, unlike democratic conditioning of getting tummy rub and treats.

So, on the subject of external conditioning, which system do u see to get the best result, the china military system or the democratic conditioning system? As for the break-my-string's case, IMO, i think that kid is gonna plateau not too much from here where as in china, he could excel to a provincial level (or higher) which he could beat the best national of canadian players who were trained under the democratic conditioning process.

In this an open discussion, not a knock of anybody's background

[TrueBlue]

Actually that motivation is enough for him to keep on training, keep on playing and probably excel on the sport. It's just a matter of getting the right responses you want at the time, as i've said before, behavior can be controlled or manipulated with the use of the proper stimulus to create the needed response. It's just like training a dog how to swim, dogs are natural swimmers, but what you want them to do is to swim when you want them to. You do this by giving them food or a good belly rub after they swim. Same theory applies to humans, you must give rewards (in psychology we call it reinforcments) when certain responses are maid. For example, giving a simple "good job!" or a tap on the shoulder will do. Like when he grasps concepts he had learned from one on one training, capitalize on the proper response by giving good feedback. Its just a matter of finding the right reward, or reinforcement in each proper response that the kid gives. This way he'll be motivated to train even harder. Like "do ten backhand serves, do it correctly and i'll give you ten bucks". Always remember to just give rewards or reinforcments with good responses that are made, or else you will be reinforcing the wrong once. Never get mad at the kid or same thing happens, you'll be getting the wrong responses and it will be a never ending cycle.

thing is a child is more intelligent and want other thing than dog. even you always pet his shoulder ´he does something you want he will find this out and doesnt bother about it unless he s afraid of you.

[venkatesh]

So, on the subject of external conditioning, which system do u see to get the best result, the china military system or the democratic conditioning system? As for the break-my-string's case, IMO, i think that kid is gonna plateau not too much from here where as in china, he could excel to a provincial level (or higher) which he could beat the best national of canadian players who were trained under the democratic conditioning process.

In this an open discussion, not a knock of anybody's background

Suffice it to say that China has more "great" players compared to Canada. Does this satisfy the conclusion that military training is more effective than the democratic system? Let us not forget the other factors. For example, (1) the advantage of population to choose the best players from (less populated countries have less players/reserves); (2) the culture (Olympic champions in China are considered heroes; thus, this drives children to dream of becoming one); (3) salary (in our country, most athletes are minimum wagers); (4) government support; etc.

IMO, perfect balance in training should be achieved. A reward/reinforcement should be given, but too much of it would spoil the trainee. Discipline should be enforced, but too much tightness could constrict or dishearten the player.

I think the military system has its pros and cons, just the same as the democratic system, as long as it does not destroy the trainees love for this sport. After all, badminton is not about the medal, the trophy, the glory, etc. It's all about the passion.

[macazteeg]

hi, it's me again.
let continue where i had left off. After having some or most of the right genes for that particular task or role, external influence will shape that athlete. What you had described is democratic conditioning if u excuse my poor use of psychology wording. That process is slow and still may not get the result desired after exhausting all your resources. Veteran badminton countries like Canada, US, UK are some examples of this democratic conditioning as described above in your post. Canada, for ex, have good players but not great players. If that kid example use by break-my-string was in china, he will be plucked by a badminton scout and put into the 'china system'. The stimulus employed is a little different. If the subject student do bad, he'll get punished, not status quo. If he/she does good, the subject escape punishment, unlike democratic conditioning of getting tummy rub and treats.


So, on the subject of external conditioning, which system do u see to get the best result, the china military system or the democratic conditioning system? As for the break-my-string's case, IMO, i think that kid is gonna plateau not too much from here where as in china, he could excel to a provincial level (or higher) which he could beat the best national of canadian players who were trained under the democratic conditioning process.

In this an open discussion, not a knock of anybody's background

Yes, it's also true, however there are a lot of factors to consider for an athlete to excel, not just the conditioning. In China, people have lesser rights, so you have to comply with the rules or else you'll be considered an outcast in the society, it's either you play or you get nothing. So they likely would not have any option better than to escape or get punished. If I were that kid and I was to be put to the chinese system I would rather quit. Chinese players excel because they have found the rewards or proper reinforcements for them to keep playing, keep training, and eventually excel in the sport. There's no point in continuing something if you dont have a reason to do it, simple as that, so even if you are under a what you call democratic system of coaching, or chinese system, you will have to find a motivation for you to keep playing. Its operant conditioning by the way, it's giving rewards or reinforcements to good responses that are elicited, for some people however you don't need to give the rewards or reinforcements they need because they have found it in themselves, like playing badminton because you want to get physical fit for some reason, or for you to be able to study college. These are the once called self-motivated people.

[macazteeg]

thing is a child is more intelligent and want other thing than dog. even you always pet his shoulder ´he does something you want he will find this out and doesnt bother about it unless he s afraid of you.

Well, if a student is afraid of the coach the he'll most likely quit right? And all that potential he has will be wasted.

[macazteeg]

A few special methods:

You could be Cai Yun and wipe non-existent sweat off your face at least once after every point won or lost. Remember to use your non-racquet palm and flick the (non-existent) sweat beads in the general direction of the service judge.

You could be Taufik Hidayat and pretend to be more interested in what's going on elsewhere than on the court you are now playing on. Remember to point your racquet at invisible pools of sweat on your side of the court and get the umpire to signal the moppers to come in so that you get a longer break between hard-fought points.

You could be Chen Jin and walk around with a perennially grumpy and dour look as if you are supremely tired of being Chen Jin. Remember to prepare for a serve by staring at your opponent and then serve the shuttle abruptly and furiously. (Remember also to occasionally clutch your back whenever you are playing Lin Dan so that it doesn't look that bad when you finally give up the game.)

You could be Lee Chong Wei and pretend to look totally dejected and morose when winning handsomely. Remember to throw up your hands, whip your head back, raise your eyebrows at least six inches and let your jaw hang whenever the line-judge rules against you on a close call.

Well, you could also throw a racquet and be as effective, if not better, as any of these worthies

Good! thank you for answering the questions! You can't get any better answer than that

[cooler]

Yes, it's also true, however there are a lot of factors to consider for an athlete to excel, not just the conditioning. In China, people have lesser rights, so you have to comply with the rules or else you'll be considered an outcast in the society, it's either you play or you get nothing. So they likely would not have any option better than to escape or get punished. If I were that kid and I was to be put to the chinese system I would rather quit. Chinese players excel because they have found the rewards or proper reinforcements for them to keep playing, keep training, and eventually excel in the sport. There's no point in continuing something if you dont have a reason to do it, simple as that, so even if you are under a what you call democratic system of coaching, or chinese system, you will have to find a motivation for you to keep playing. Its operant conditioning by the way, it's giving rewards or reinforcements to good responses that are elicited, for some people however you don't need to give the rewards or reinforcements they need because they have found it in themselves, like playing badminton because you want to get physical fit for some reason, or for you to be able to study college. These are the once called self-motivated people.

Well, if a student is afraid of the coach the he'll most likely quit right? And all that potential he has will be wasted.

You are still referencing your argument in the democratic framework. If the kid quit, his/her parents will push him/her back to training because professional sport career is alot more rewarding than being a peasant, or a factory worker at best. If that kid know he is there because he can be trained for free to become a star player, why would he quit? If the training is so tough, how about his alternative of slaving away in the factory 10 hrs day, 5-6 days/week. Which career path has the better reward to work ratio? If that kid don't have the smart and drive to know this opportunity, the coach likley boot him out anyway.

[macazteeg]

You are still referencing your argument in the democratic framework. If the kid quit, his/her parents will push him/her back to training because professional sport career is alot more rewarding than being a peasant, or a factory worker at best. If that kid know he is there because he can be trained for free to become a star player, why would he quit? If the training is so tough, how about his alternative of slaving away in the factory 10 hrs day, 5-6 days/week. Which career path has the better reward to work ratio? If that kid don't have the smart and drive to know this opportunity, the coach likley boot him out anyway.

Yes, that answers the wuestion, the kid will work for the reward if he knows what the rewards are. No matter what kind of training an athlete gets, either military or chinese style or whatever, all human beings function using a reward / reinforcement procedure.

[cooler]

Yes, that answers the wuestion, the kid will work for the reward if he knows what the rewards are. No matter what kind of training an athlete gets, either military or chinese style or whatever, all human beings function using a reward / reinforcement procedure.

i think that is too general of a statement. It is common sense that people do thing for a reason, it is not ancient secret or scientific fact. I mean it is too general because there are exceptions. I have to use an off topic example, if a serial killer search and kill innocent victims because he/she was hearing voices in his head, what reward or motive that drive him/her to do this out of norm activity/function?

[Fidget]

You are still referencing your argument in the democratic framework. If the kid quit, his/her parents will push him/her back to training because professional sport career is alot more rewarding than being a peasant, or a factory worker at best. If that kid know he is there because he can be trained for free to become a star player, why would he quit? If the training is so tough, how about his alternative of slaving away in the factory 10 hrs day, 5-6 days/week. Which career path has the better reward to work ratio? If that kid don't have the smart and drive to know this opportunity, the coach likley boot him out anyway.

It is doubtful that simple economic or purely logical reasons are the explanation why people in either the "democratic" or "military" systems succeed. Cold logic is not enough to succeed.

In a rigid system, the majority of people who stick it out will be those whose personalities can take pointless repetition and who find it sufficient incentive to please a slave-driving coach. The Chinese system surely has plenty of such automatons. But there has to be something special about those who rise to the very top. Utter self-confidence somehow mixed with the prerequisite servility to the coach/system. Weird. Think Lin Dan.

For a democratic nation, the people who succeed are those very self-motivated types that can never be happy with themselves; those who, despite every societal pressure luring them to easy pleasures, force themselves to perfection. Think Peter Rasmussen.

What says the great sports med guru? Are these types the same animal born in different systems. Would they have both reached the top if they had been brought up in the others culture?

[macazteeg]

i think that is too general of a statement. It is common sense that people do thing for a reason, it is not ancient secret or scientific fact. I mean it is too general because there are exceptions. I have to use an off topic example, if a serial killer search and kill innocent victims because he/she was hearing voices in his head, what reward or motive that drive him/her to do this out of norm activity/function?

Yes it is too general but it's true, plain common sense, you dont have to be a rocket scientist to figure that out, how come you don't figure it out at first? Well, being insane is an organic condition, it is very different because obviously it is not normal. Have you heard of Saddists and masochists? they get the feeling of pleasure in hurting or being hurt, Psychiatrists can give you a scientific explanation to that, but a very simple explanation is they encounter pleasure in doint it, we really dont know why. but the fact that it gives pleasure to them is plain simple example the Humans finction on a reward/ reinforcement basis.

[Fidget]

I would not say that all people with psychosis enjoy their acts. They are often acting on irresistible compulsions more out of fear, or because they are absolutely convinced it is the right course. I haven't met serial killers, but have dealt with enough psychosis to know that they are acting according to "reward/avoidance of punishement" just like the rest of us....just on their own level of reality. Not a light topic, let me tell you.

[cooler]

Yes it is too general but it's true, plain common sense, you dont have to be a rocket scientist to figure that out, how come you don't figure it out at first? Well, being insane is an organic condition, it is very different because obviously it is not normal. Have you heard of Saddists and masochists? they get the feeling of pleasure in hurting or being hurt, Psychiatrists can give you a scientific explanation to that, but a very simple explanation is they encounter pleasure in doint it, we really dont know why. but the fact that it gives pleasure to them is plain simple example the Humans finction on a reward/ reinforcement basis.

u didnt answer my example, this type of killer draw no pleasure nor financial reward. The voice told him/her to do it. How does this fit into the reward/reinforcement theory ?

[venkatesh]

u didnt answer my example, this type of killer draw no pleasure nor financial reward. The voice told him/her to do it. How does this fit into the reward/reinforcement theory ?

I know this question is not addressed to me. Sorry for butting in.

Perhaps to make the voice stop? Isn't that the reward/reinforcement?

I'm no expert

[Fidget]

I know this question is not addressed to me. Sorry for butting in.

Open discussion, is it not?

Perhaps to make the voice stop? Isn't that the reward/reinforcement?

That's the ticket! (kind of).