Results 1 to 17 of 17
Thread: about the participation
10-26-2009, 05:00 AM #1
about the participation
i hope bwf set the rules like:
every country top 3 player/pair that in top 50 world ranking should participate atleast 8 ss or above
unless they have injury(need to be proof by bwf doctor)
this is to made sure all the ss have enough fame player to participate
10-26-2009, 05:39 AM #2
..what will happen to those players who refuse or can't participate in at least 8 tourneys??..Is BWF going to suspend them indefinitely? subtract their BWF points? take back their cheque money? How will BWF enforce that 8 tourneys participation?
This sort of goes back to an early discussion on how BWF should promote the game even more and how should they provide the incentives for players?
I brought up an idea that since baddie is not as cash rich as tennis, which also has 4 major GS, why don't BWF schedule just 4 or 6 major tourneys which offer at least $500,000 in prize money.
So, rather than having the current 12 SS tourneys format, they can make those 4 or 6 high prized tourneys, along with the WC, Olympics and the other team events, the main centerpiece of pro badminton competition.
10-26-2009, 05:54 AM #3
10-26-2009, 06:06 AM #4
^^No LCW or LD or TH or PG in a WC??..^^
- Hmm, if LCW can't participate in a WC or SC or TC or Olympics simply because he didn't participate in 8 SS, i could sense people would be crying "that's bloody ridiculous!"..Imagine if there are no LD, LCW, TH, PG, SDK, PSH or BP in the WC?!?!...but instead we see Hafiz Hashim, KBH in the WC??..
- The Grand Slam thingy is a comparison to how BWF could follow tennis in making badminton more popular. How do they make it popular esp. for the pro players? Well, one way is to increase the prize money for a tourney ala the Grand Slam events in tennis. If you're a pro player, wouldn't you be tempted to participate in those high prized tourneys? I'm sure the top players wouldn't need to think twice abt joining them.
10-26-2009, 07:33 AM #5
10-26-2009, 08:17 AM #6
The major tournaments are suppose to raise awareness and popularity of badminton to the general population. It would be counter productive to deliberately lower the quality of players at those competitions.
As a side note, how does this system work logically or logistically?
Let's say a player is the only professional player in their country, ranked 30th in the world, played in 7 SS last year. Are you saying that their country can not attend the Olympic Games for badminton?
Let's say a rising young star, ranked 51th in the world from playing only 5 SS last year. He plays in the All England this year, gets to semi-finals, then rises to 50th rank because the 49th ranked player could not play in the All England and could not get the points. Are you saying that this young player can not play this year's Sudirman Cup?
10-26-2009, 08:25 AM #7
New Sub-Forum at BC: Rules/Tournament Regulations/Officiating
Just found out that we have this new Sub-Forum at BC: Rules / Tournament Regulation / Officiating.
Personally, I don't think that BWF can enforce this rule, namely: Every country top 3 players/pairs in the top 50 World Ranking should participate in at least 8 SS.
IMHO, BWF can only encourage top players to participate in their tournaments. If players are not ready, they should be allowed to skip tournaments.
Last edited by chris-ccc; 10-26-2009 at 08:36 AM.
10-26-2009, 08:45 PM #8
It would be better not to allow players to withdraw after they have registered for a tournament, except for reasons of injury that has to be confirmed by a BWF-registered doctor.
11-10-2009, 04:53 AM #9
Not to allow players to withdraw after they have registered for a tournament?
To not bring headaches to tournament organisers, what you've proposed is not wrong.
However, BWF can only encourage top players to participate in their tournaments. If players are not ready, they should be allowed to skip tournaments. Otherwise, many SS players would have been banned already. And Lin Dan, our current best player, is one of the frequent offenders.
Last edited by chris-ccc; 11-10-2009 at 04:58 AM.
11-11-2009, 05:01 AM #10
How about releasing draw on the eve of the tournament + imposing minor world ranking point reduction and fines to those who withdraw last minute(players/organization only allow to withdraw 10 working days before the tournament being held)?
For the frequent offenders(having late withdrawal up to 3 times or more in that calender year), BWF reserve the right to ban players from entering the next tournament or any big events sanctioned by BWF. This means that if any of the players(MS,MD,WS,XD or WD) from a particular badminton association managed to violate the late withdraw rule for up to 3 times, then BWF reserve the right to ban either a few of the players(to the most frequent offenders) or all the players from that association from entering the next tournament or big events such as WC.
I know you gonna argue that, people won't want to see 2nd tier players duking it out in the WC. But, heck the public can't do anything right if the players/associations wanna put themselves in a situation where they cannot compete in the big events. BWF needs to make their stand so that people can take them more seriously. Sad to say, I dont think the powerhouses from asia(especially China and Korea) are giving BWF the respect that they deserved. Currently, the powerhouses think that BWF/ their events are something that is dispensable or even worth laughing at. So BWF needs to shows its authority and not letting other association toy with them as they are the governing body here not the association from the powerhouse countries. Hopefully, these suggestions will discourage those organization to cut down their irresponsible act.
Last edited by majyun; 11-11-2009 at 05:05 AM.
12-01-2009, 08:27 PM #11
So, that means, say an independent up & coming Vietnamese player, like NTM (pre-sponsorship period) who could only participate in a GP or GP Gold tourneys, registers but then pulls out @ the last minute for any reason, that player will still get a $10,000 fine??..
But i see the point of imposing a stiffer penalty. And that is to make all the players, esp. the top ones, realize they need to participate in tourneys, one way or another. In a way, that requirement will enhance the image of badminton and will "force" top players to show up. Thus if CHN players decide not to come to one tourney, then they would have to figure out how to make up that loss by participating in other tourneys. Enhancing those other tourneys.
But, here's the thing, if the CHN squad still doesn't care or budge even if they get heavier fines, how will that change the atmosphere of competition, esp. in a SSMF type of competition, other than BWF pocketing even more money? We'll still get to see Charmaine Reid vs. a Thai player competing.
12-02-2009, 01:32 AM #12
The moral is: If you don't support the system by playing it's tournaments then you cannot win the medals.
I don't care **** if LD is the best player. If he doesn't play enough tournament he can not be part of the system and we will then get ahother Olympic and world champion and LD will soon be forgotten.
We have to see BWF and the Super Series circuit as a company, and the players from all over the world as employees and colleagues in the entertainment business. And if you don't show up at work you're fired!
12-02-2009, 01:34 AM #13
12-04-2009, 07:31 PM #14
We cannot compare 2009 Badminton with 2009 Tennis
If we are talking about players as employees of BWF, then of course BWF can say "If you don't show up, then you'll be fired". But the truth is: Our players are employees of their National Associations, not BWF.
We cannot compare 2009 Badminton with 2009 Tennis. 2009 Badminton players are similar to 1969 Tennis players, where most players were under the control of their National Associations.
Perhaps, the extract below (about our Great Australian Tennis player, Rod Laver) can throw some light on this matter.
Source: Wimbledon Website (click here for history of Rod_Laver)
But Rod Laver had merely lit a fuse. By the time he made his final appearance at Wimbledon in 1971 he had been Champion four times and Runner-Up twice. On the broader world stage he had eclipsed all argument about his abilities by winning the Grand Slam twice, in 1962 and again in 1969. In what are usually the best years of a player's career – 24 to 29 – he was absent from the traditional championships because he had turned professional. His record is rock solid as it stands. How much greater would it have been if he had played all the way through?
Laver won Wimbledon for the first time in 1961, having played two five-set matches in the early stages. But he won the final over the American Chuck McKinley in under an hour. The following summer Laver came into Wimbledon an even stronger favourite after winning the titles of Italy, France, and Germany. At Wimbledon he won each match in straight sets with the exception of the quarter-final, where he lost the first set to the Spaniard Manuel Santana. Later in 1962, Laver signed a professional contract for £50,000.
Increasingly, the forward thinkers in tennis wanted an end to a situation where the game created big-name "amateurs" only to see them leave the traditional framework for upfront rewards in the professional game. The British fought hard and long for change, none more so than the All England Club, and in August 1967, there was a significant development in the staging of a one week eight-man professional event on the Centre Court at Wimbledon. Not only did Laver win the tournament against Ken Rosewall in the Final, but the wheels were turning rapidly towards an open game. In December 1967, the Lawn Tennis Association voted to delete all reference to amateur and professional players and by the following April, when the British Hard Court Chanmpionships were staged at Bournemouth, open tennis became a fact.
So, if BWF wants to be an employer of players, then BWF would need to get players to sign professional contracts, just like Tennis did almost half a century ago.
Regarding the 2009 Super Series Masters Finals, BWF tried to follow Tennis, but fell short of signing up players to be professionals.
Last edited by chris-ccc; 12-04-2009 at 07:45 PM.
12-05-2009, 12:11 AM #15
many though the player is wayyyyyyyyyyy bigger than bwf
like bwf ned to knee down then just have player want to participate in their event
12-05-2009, 02:53 AM #16
What I am saying is BWF has to support the players first
No, I am not saying that players are not supporting BWF.
In the example given, Tennis players were in the same position (40 years ago) as Badminton players are now. National Associations were supporting their players (in their expenses). Players were playing for their countries, not for the money.
Rod Laver took the risk to play for the money. Australia was still represented by him, and Australians were proud of him.
What I am saying is BWF has to support the players first (to be independent professionals). Only then will players begin leaving their National Associations to play for money.
However, only the best of the best players will dare to take the risk.
If no win, no prize money. The smaller professional contracts could be hard to live on.
12-05-2009, 06:16 AM #17
By Monster in forum General ForumReplies: 17: 01-04-2010, 06:10 AM
By ixory in forum World Championships 2007Replies: 33: 08-07-2007, 12:29 AM
By DaN_fAn in forum German Open / All England / Swiss Open 2005Replies: 26: 02-24-2005, 04:22 PM
By Phil in forum Canada EastReplies: 4: 05-21-2004, 09:10 PM