User Tag List

Results 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Shenyang, Liaoning, China
    Posts
    180
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default The regulation of T&U C should be reformed

    It's nonsensical that the order of participating players in T&U C must be accordant with the newest world ranking published by the IBF, which do not really reflect the level of players themselves.

    I think the IBF should accordingly use a new rule to protect the justice and justness of competition after the new world ranking system was used. If the IBF still use current one, the competition of the T&U C will not be regard as the "five-star" team competition. You see the Number one isn't always the championships.

    So, I think it is time to return the old 5-singles-and-4-duobles best of 9 system instead of the current 3-singles-and-2-duobles best of 5 one. And the 4-singles-and-1-duobles best of 5 system which is like Tennis team competition is also better one than the current. I don't think it will reduce doubles' importance in team competition because we have S C competition which includes 3 doubles.

    Many associations have taken the advantage of the current regulation to make a achievement by controlling players' world ranking, i.e. a player may not take part in some tournaments or reduce the times of taking part in tournaments during the period to reduce their ranking. And when a player who should be the 1st singles in a team competition becomes the 2nd or 3rd singles by his or her "the newest world ranking", the difference among the 1st, 2nd and 3rd is ridiculous, so do doubles. And then the whole competition also becomes ridiculous. This happened in 2002 T&U C in Guangzhou, China, in which the World Champion and the European Champion became the 3rd singles in Indonesian and Denmark team

  2. #2
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts
    3,342
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Suggest an alternative.

  3. #3
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Outside the box
    Posts
    12,517
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    In way it is nonsense but it is the most logical way at the moment.

    You cannot just go on the performances of the WC to decide the players rankings. There are such things as current form. Badminton doesn;t have enough money that players go and play in any tournaments they wish. It's the association that sends them out.

    Although you may gripe about, 'wrong rankings', this is just a matter of tactics. It is quite acceptable in athletics (using a pacemaker to help set a world record), cycling ( a team working for an individual).

    I don't want to see best of 9 games format. It needs two days. That was OK in the past with long travelling times and a less rushed world.

    Now the world's society works at a much faster pace. The final needs to be finished over one day. (don't use tennis as an example, anyway, the Davis Cup doesn't have the same prestige).

    If the finals are not finshed in one day, then commentators are tired, teams are tired, spectators are tired. TV coverage? I'd be worried they get tired and we see less badminton.

    I have seen the 1982 Thomas Cup and comparing to the 5 matches format, I think 5 matches are an improvment, OVERALL.
    I think we need to take the big picture into view rather than change the whole tournament format for a small point.

  4. #4
    Administrator kwun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Santa Clara, California, United States
    Posts
    35,338
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    43 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)

    Default

    XZ,

    i agree with Cheung who agrees with you that the current system is non-sensical. however, i also fail to find the solutions provided by you makes any more sense than the current system.

    you said using the WRS is ridiculous, so i am guessing you also implied that you want to scrape using the WRS as a way to sort out the play order. without referencing the WRS, how are they supposed to decide the play order? are you suggesting a free ordering that allow the coach to put any players in any order? that will be WORSE.

    also, i don't see how having 9 events is any better than 5. and why having a 4/1 single/double ratio is any better than a 3/2 ratio. perhaps you can clarify on these points?

    tennis is a different sport altogether where they are singles heavy. i personally haven't watched one double tennis match. there just aren't enough interests for it.

    i very much agree with Cheung on the pace of today's society and the length of the event.

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Shenyang, Liaoning, China
    Posts
    180
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Using the best of 9 will not increase time. The reason as follows:

    http://www.badmintonforum.com/vb/sho...hlight=Xu+Zhen

    Using "4 singles and 1 doubles" mainly wants to solve "ridiculous", after all, it's more real than the current.

    I think that currently using the world ranking to decide the order of player is the same thing as not. Why do I say so? Please look at the world ranking just before the competition such as T&U C and Asian Game. Don't you think it's ridiculous? World Champion's ranking is out of 100th and many country's the best players aren't in their real place just for a "good" order in team competition. Sure, T&U C are very different from the Davis Cup, so I hope watch a "real" high level competition. If T&U C is the same as the Davis Cup, I will not worry about it, and even don't watch it. And in other words, the things presented above just happened on this background in which two cups is very important to every association and player who is proud of being a nominee.

    I don't think the current men's and ladies' team competitions are high level tournaments, they are more like a variety show than a serious competition.

    BTW, Cheung, can you understand chinese? If you can, I hope you watch it:

    http://www.chinabadminton.com/cgi-bin/bbs/list.cgi

    My English isn't better than my chinese, here is my all points of view about it.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    San Jose, California
    Posts
    1,601
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I still don't see any better way suggested in this thread to set the play order other using the ranking. I don't like the Davis Cup format neither. One dominant single play can usually gain 2 points easily, and the rest of the team only need to gain 1 out of 3 points to win. One example is when Boris Becker or John McEnore played 2 singles and the double, he can singled handed carry the whole team. It no longer a team sport any more.

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Shenyang, Liaoning, China
    Posts
    180
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Some years ago, I watched a game between DONG Jiong and JI Xinpeng? under "bout point" system agreed specially by the IBF during China Tianwang Challenge tournament which was an exhibition game for popularizing Badminton in China. I feel it very excited and very interest, what's more, it could control the time of per game no more than 20 minutes, and whole competition was no more than 1 hour(Dong 2-0 JI?¡ª¡ª3x25). so I think if the IBF can use 3x15 "bout point" system in team competition and 5x15 "bout point" system in the individual one, the time of team competition will no more than 3 hours in the best of 5 or 5 hours in the best of 9, and the time of the individual will be moderate¡ª¡ªabout 1 hour. And then the team competition under the best of 9 system will certainly finish in one day. In point of fact, "bout point" system makes competition more beautiful than the current one! Don't you believe it? Try it yourself, that's great!

  8. #8
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Outside the box
    Posts
    12,517
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    XZ,

    sorry, my chinese is really bad
    Not able to have a chinese education whilst at school. Problems with a deprived childhood!

    OK, your arguments sound a little more reasonable with the explanation of a change in scoring system.

    The 'bout' point system. Can you explain a little more? Not sure how it works. I did not see those challenge matches you were refering to.

    For it to be implemented, we would have to have a new scoring system. One specifically catering for the TC/UC.
    Now, to have two scoring systems for badminton. Would this be confusing or logical to the casual observer/social player?

    Then we would have to revise the whole scoring system again!

    I believe any system should be simple and easy to understand. Going by world ranking is simple. Not that I don't agree with the old format. It just isn't so practical nowadays. For your suggested solution, I need to know more first.

Similar Threads

  1. [BWF] The format of the Sudirman Cup will be reformed
    By cxytdn in forum Sudirman Cup 2009
    Replies: 5
    : 12-15-2009, 01:35 AM
  2. "Full Effort" Regulation.
    By Quasimodo in forum Professional Players
    Replies: 18
    : 10-23-2006, 07:55 AM
  3. new IBF singles t-shirt color regulation..
    By kwun in forum Clothing & Footwear
    Replies: 5
    : 10-04-2003, 10:32 AM
  4. Regulation Height
    By blane in forum General Forum
    Replies: 2
    : 06-24-2001, 12:22 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
  •