Results 1 to 17 of 17
06-15-2010, 07:52 AM #1
Individual approach in the badminton systems Worldwide
Hi everybody! I hope all of you have great badminton day!
I saw that many people are interested in developing as players and coaches and I am very happy to see it. I am in the same "frequency" .
In the last 7 years I have studied and compared many different systems for badminton development in the countries who are dominating the badminton success World wide - China, Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore, Korea, Japan, Denmark - and I have studied most of the relevant sources which are possible to find through people, Internet and all other ways . I have seen the topic of chirs-ccc for the different badminton training systems used by different countries and the idea of my topic is in very different direction.
I have succeed to collect more than 2200 different researches, analysis, books and other kind of materials (video, clips, even audios) all about badminton development.
One of the most interesting discovering that I have made is that I did found any kind of biomechanical analysis made based on the trajectory, spin and speed of the shuttle. Actually all of the biomechanical analysis what I have are observing some of the best players in the specific system and "discover" the way those players are performing specific strokes and specifying the muscles, sequences of firing up, etc...but NONE is starting from where I believe we all are wishing to start - what exactly is happening with the shuttle in all tactical situations, according to the speed, spin and trajectory of it (please, if you have any research about something similar to this - share it with me). That's why I have challenge myself to developed research of this in my PhD study. I hope it will be soon enough . I want even to develop a 3D model stimulator based on this research.
The second very interested thing what I have found out that there is NONE specified determination of WHAT BADMINTON REALLY IS. Now, please don't tell me what some of the notational analysis are saying of the the length of the rallies and etc. I have made by myself more than 15 detailed notational analysis of the same elite players in the last 1 1/2 years - of Lin Dan, Lee Chong Way and Peter Gade - and you know what this data is VERY DIFFERENT of what are the normal notational analysis are saying. I developed a way to define what badminton is in the different levels according to the observing parameters in the dimensional analysis. I literally rediscovered the World Top badminton. I found a big dimensional differences between most of the very top players - and of course than it is very easy to see the very weak points and the very strong points of any top player.
I found as well that there is NONE study which makes a IMAGE of what looks like the World Best level in all areas - technical, tactical, mental and conditioning. None as well for what should be the World best coach be or looks like - methods, strategies, etc. I know that especially the coaches it is very, very hard to compare anything because of many pure social and cultural differences, which influence a lot what is important for the specific badminton system. Example? Most of the Asian players are talking about improving the footwork and in Denmark we can talk mostly about tactics. Please, correct me if I am not right . Of course I am talking about high elite level. It is as well obvious when you compare the sources - I can make a whole overview of who of those systems develops most what and where they are the best and where are the weakest . But thats an other topic - actually a whole book.
And how all of this is connected with the individual approach based WorldWide?
In all of those systems this individual approach is mainly into the "view" of the system. So practically it is not very individual . Or may be it is more correct if I say - it is individual based on the paradigm of the system. But is than individual? Example. How many of you have every made genetic screening of the genes which effects the sport performance? Now you are going to say - this is for super top elite players... Yes and No. For them this can make the 1-2% differences and for some of them will be even more than 10% differences in the results. But it is actually the most important in the kids... Why? An other whole topic. Just to mention that for now (and as far as I know) some of the very important information is hidden in the genes connected with the sport performance. So practically if I coach a kids that is extreme talent and I have a genetic test like that I will be able to lower the risk from future injuries and even develop the performance a lot from the start.
Lastly. Badminton is one of the sport which still has very few researches and real analysis comparing to sport like weight lifting or swimming. I have made my effort to combine all of the systems Worldwide in a Globalized system which observes everything is a quite different way - nothing so new, just the way it is combined is quite different. I hope you will see it soon
Now time for discussion . How do you see the individual approach in the systems Worldwide? Which is your system that you are part of? I think I will help you even to see the paradigms of your own system - and thats not easy!
vosko liked this post
06-15-2010, 09:32 AM #2
06-15-2010, 10:03 AM #3
Thanks! The effort comes from my pure desire to develop myself as coach . This is how I started to gather different information since 2001. Afterwards during the 2002 I started to systemize them in different way. The hardest was to empty the "trash" if I can say like that.
06-15-2010, 10:17 AM #4
Frankly, what exactly are you trying to postulate here?
06-15-2010, 10:47 AM #5
Something very simple. But you have to see the questions .
I am trying to show the paradigms in the different system. And all of them are actually confronting with the individual approach.
Have you ever hear that this player is very talented, because he is exactly this size or he has this skills, etc...if you see the same player in a different system (or paradigm) he might not be any longer that talented, because the dimension of what talented player is, is different in the different systems.
But the questions are the most important everything before makes you thinking how it is realted with them.
06-15-2010, 12:14 PM #6
Why not make it simple by giving a specific example of what you are trying to tell us? What are the many badminton systems, which you seem to pick up from chris-ccc as gospel truth, are you talking about? This and your statement that Asians are talking more about footwork whilst the Danes only on tactics truly astonish me. On on earth can you make such a claim? Everyone has a different opinion of a player's talent or skill, so this is nothing new. Also to what use and purpose is your research headed for? Is it to re-educate coaches so they can see their errors by using your new discoveries?
Frankly, I stand to be convinced.
06-15-2010, 01:42 PM #7
sound interesting but i still don't quite understand the questions:
- How do you see the individual approach in the systems Worldwide?
- Which is your system that you are part of?
06-15-2010, 02:24 PM #8
I think there may be a language problem here. ljutzkanov is apparently from Denmark, and is probably not a native English speaker.
I find it difficult to understand what he's talking about. There seems to be a lot of hyperbole and bombast -- "I literally rediscovered the World Top badminton" -- but again, this could be attributable to translation issues.
ljutzkanov, if you want anyone to understand you, I think you will need to simplify your writing. Simplify it a lot.
06-15-2010, 03:21 PM #9
Thanks Gollum. I will try to simplify it .
The hyperbole and bombast expression is personal. When I read any scientific data, I care what is about in details and how can I transfer it in my own practices or how can use it in any way. My great discovering what you mention above is connected with the dimensions of the highest level of Badminton. As dimensions I mean: volume, intensity and their combinations. My surprise comes from this that many authors allow themselves to generalize their researches, which in my eyes is not correct. Why? Because at the different levels the volume and the intensity of the game will be very different and therefore and the dimensions of the game will be different.
Here I have to clearefy what I mean by volume and intensity and how do I measure them.
There is something called passive volume of the game - the general time of the game with the rests and with the rallies. The active volume is the game observed only by the time of the rallies. The intensity which mostly we are looking for is connected with the active volume. We want to know how many strokes per rally (avarage) and how many strokes per time (strokes/min). We want to know the avarage rally length and to relate it with the avarage intensity (again strokes/min). It is also very important to measure the movements made per rally and again movements per minute. Especially the movements are the issues which can help us to observe the real intensity for the player, as far as we can precisly calculate the contractions per minute or per rally. This can help us understand what is the difference between the intensity of the both players, playing against each other.
So, this is what I ment by "rediscovered the World Top badminton". I found sagnificent difference between the provided data and between the reality.
Why this is so important for me and why do I mention it?
If I know what are the dimensions of the level which my players plays at, I should be able to construct a correct practices in the sense of intensity and volume. I mean I will know what I am targeting to achieve as intensity of the rallies and generall volume for the game.
I hope that this makes it a bit clearer . Please, excuse me for my English. I am trying my best .
I will try to "translate" the questions .
1. If you are part of a system for development how do you see the individual development in it?
As system for development I mean: any educational form in which is specificated priorities and importance of the development. Example: if you are in Malaysia, which are the most important elements of the game (or areas of the game) for your coaches and how this elements are applied individually? If like example you are in Malaysia, but your coach is Chinese, you might discover that you are actually part of the system which you coach uses for development. The systems therefore are much more connected with what your coaches are influences from, than the place where you are situated.
2. Which system you are part of? - I think that I have also clearify this question as defined the system above.
I hope that now is more clear . Big thank to Gollum and pBmMalaysia for the comments!
P.S.: I think that the globalisation is applied in badminton development as well. There are much less coaches which are influenced only by one system. More and more are influenced by much more systems. We always create a system which we work within, regardless do we understand it or not.
06-15-2010, 10:42 PM #10
yes, what you have mentioned is a more complex sports science towards badminton and everyday i have been searching for an answer it would be my dream if you can provide me with the answer
first we need a lot of patience and we need data of players, their games analysis and from there we construct practices with the appropriate intensity and volume and following the six steps system (dolcetti, 2001) towards that is one good start. the rest is purely understanding the player from top to bottom and the greatest of all is to beat the system!
06-16-2010, 04:46 AM #11If I know what are the dimensions of the level which my players plays at, I should be able to construct a correct practices in the sense of intensity and volume. I mean I will know what I am targeting to achieve as intensity of the rallies and generall volume for the game.
This certainly sounds interesting and ambitious. Good luck with it all, and let us know how you get on!
06-16-2010, 05:38 AM #12
06-16-2010, 06:58 AM #13
Thank you all for encouraging me !
I have to tell you that this system is already a fact - I mean a complete system for developing a players in all areas - technical, tactical, mental and conditioning (there is a reason why I write mental instead of psychological and conditioning instead of physiological) and it is coming soon as open - source . I don't want to make any advertisement here, but I am sure that you will hear it soon again. It took me almost 7 years in researching and 3 years in writing it. Now it is being customized as well for coaches educations and it will include and the pedagogic and psychological approaches. It involves most of the newest methods and technique for coaching...
I hope you will love it, as I do .
06-16-2010, 12:06 PM #14
thats great and meanwhile we wait for more information from you!
06-17-2010, 01:06 AM #15
This is a very difficult study. I'm think most of the members of this forum will be interested in you research. I wish you all the best.
If you are in need of a copyeditor, just PM me. I have been a copyeditor for 7 years. I am well versed in different style manuals such as Chicago Manual of Style, AMA Manual of Style, CBE Manual, ACS Manual, etc.
I think you'd benefit from a copyeditor a lot as some of our responsibilities is to make your readers understand your thoughts, make it more coherent, format your article into a consistent scientific writing, and correct the grammar, spelling, and punctuations. I will give you a big discount.
06-17-2010, 03:44 AM #16
Thank you for your offer Venkatesh, but I already have one! . I understand as well that it is very important that it is perfect and understandable.
And I understand that to be my copyeditor is not easy thing , but happily the one I have is really good and as well is involved in sport science editing, so it is just perfect . Thank you again!
06-18-2010, 12:56 AM #17
Cool. I really wish you well. I have to correct myself, though. "Some of our responsibilities is" should be "some of your responsibilities are". Initially, my entry was "one of our responsibilities is to make your readers understand your thoughts". However, I changed my mind and cited more examples, thus, changing "a" into "some" but failing to change "is" into "are". Hahaha. My bad.
By shooting stroke in forum Coaching ForumReplies: 3: 09-02-2010, 08:49 PM
By chris-ccc in forum Professional PlayersReplies: 23: 01-20-2008, 08:58 AM
By dmwg40 in forum General ForumReplies: 0: 04-25-2007, 09:49 PM
By Tezta.com in forum EuropeReplies: 1: 12-22-2004, 07:49 AM
By Stephen Mooney in forum Techniques / TrainingReplies: 10: 02-21-2002, 01:26 PM