User Tag List

Results 1 to 13 of 13
  1. #1
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Malaysia
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Lightbulb 2x21 rally, 12 rally scoring system in 3rd game to increase the excitement of game.

    Personally, I would prefer to shorten the point scoring system in 3rd set (rubber set):

    A game shall be won by the side which first scores 21 points for the game. This should apply to the first 2 games.

    For the rubber set, a game shall be won by the side which first scores 12 points for the third game:
    Players shall change ends when a side first scores 6 points in third game.
    If the score becomes 11-all, the side which gains a two point lead first, shall win that game.
    If the score becomes 20-all, the side scoring the 21st point shall win that game.

    I come out with this idea as we had seen a lot of players unable to perform well and makes the games look dull and less excited during rubber set.

    Also for the serving part, I think the players should be given 2nd chance to do the serve after the 1st fault serve. Else sometimes the game may end up not because of rally winning by the players' effort but due to numerous service errors.

    Above is just my personally opinion. Any personnel please feel free to voice out your view about it.

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    3,333
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Your 2.5 games sound like a good idea except for one problem. The player who wins G1 may just give away and rests for G2 and then come out firing in G3. So it may give rise to boring G2 and lopsided G3.

    However your idea inspires another idea. How about this:

    G1 : 21x2
    G2 : 19x2
    G3 : 23x2

    Players to change ends after each interval for G1 and G2 like in G3. This will cancel out any drift factor within each game so the scores will be closer and more exciting instead of lopsided like some matches in MO and KO which were clearly influenced by the strong drift.

    The shorter G2 is to entice the G1 winner to try and take G2 to win the match instead of choosing to rest in G2 to be fresher for G3. This will make G2 exciting.

    The longer G3 is to allow the G2 winner more time to recover to fight back against the G1 winner who rested for G2 and have the advantage of a fast start in G3.

    In any case, the present scoring system should have players change ends after each interval in all games instead of only G3.

  3. #3
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Western Hemisphere
    Posts
    1,078
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I'd rather go the ping pong route, 5 games of 11 points.

    In this way, there is no room for slacks in each game. And there is more hope for a come back after falling behind (and giving up a game or two).

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    MY
    Posts
    127
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Huh???

    what's the relevancy discussing this under German Open / All England / Swiss Open thread??

  5. #5
    Moderator drifit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Selangor, Malaysia
    Posts
    6,428
    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kennee View Post
    what's the relevancy discussing this under German Open / All England / Swiss Open thread??
    op must have been following MAS Open and KOR Open, getting tired watching the games stretching to much longer hours. thus, this opinion follows up.
    this thread has been move to more appropriate section to get more responses/views from others.

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Adelaide, Australia
    Posts
    407
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Badminton seems to be heading the same way as doubles in tennis, where they've shortened the scoring system so much that the game loses much of its tension and drama. Personally I like to see longer games. If people are getting tired in the third game, then maybe a longer interval between games is needed?

  7. #7
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Malaysia
    Posts
    68
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pjswift View Post
    Your 2.5 games sound like a good idea except for one problem. The player who wins G1 may just give away and rests for G2 and then come out firing in G3. So it may give rise to boring G2 and lopsided G3.

    However your idea inspires another idea. How about this:

    G1 : 21x2
    G2 : 19x2
    G3 : 23x2

    Players to change ends after each interval for G1 and G2 like in G3. This will cancel out any drift factor within each game so the scores will be closer and more exciting instead of lopsided like some matches in MO and KO which were clearly influenced by the strong drift.

    The shorter G2 is to entice the G1 winner to try and take G2 to win the match instead of choosing to rest in G2 to be fresher for G3. This will make G2 exciting.

    The longer G3 is to allow the G2 winner more time to recover to fight back against the G1 winner who rested for G2 and have the advantage of a fast start in G3.

    In any case, the present scoring system should have players change ends after each interval in all games instead of only G3.


    Ya true indeed, however try to think off one thing:
    If the loser in G1 suddenly bounce off and and win the G2, the winner in G2 will gain the psychology advantage over the winner of G1, this will indeed inject more excitement when coming into G3... So winner in G1 won't give up or let go the game easily then...What do you think anyway?

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Worcestershire
    Posts
    210
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Some bright spark in the Worcester league decided that 21x2, 21x2, 5x1 would be a good idea?!? Although I've won all of my 'tie-breaks', some of them were due to a net-chord or a mis-hit. This robbed me of all satisfaction from 'winning'. I dread to think how the opposition felt!

    I've also played in a tournament in Germany that was 21x2, 21x2, 11x1 (change at 6). Personally, I feel that this is better.

    Generally, I agree with alexh. Games can be very short, which pressurises people into 'playing safe', which can be tedious to say the least. For anything below county, I would advocate 25x2 (still max 30), 25x2 (max 30), 11x1 (change at 6).

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Uppsala, Sweden
    Posts
    216
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by alexh View Post
    Badminton seems to be heading the same way as doubles in tennis, where they've shortened the scoring system so much that the game loses much of its tension and drama. Personally I like to see longer games. If people are getting tired in the third game, then maybe a longer interval between games is needed?
    I agree, why the need to shorten the games??? There are only financial reasons (iow TV commercials) which likes to shorten our attention span in everyday life.

    However for the regular series/league matches I think the system they are trying this year in the swedish first division is really OK. They play the first two games to 21 (max30) running score as usual. But the 3rd is only played to 11 (change at 6). The reason for this is to shorten the team matches (7= 2MS+1WS+2MD+1WD+1MXD). The public (and players) just don't have the time to be in the stadium for 3-4 hours an ordinary evening. By this system the league matches seldom takes more than 2h (2 courts used)

    But for SS and championships I still think the usual 3x21 is best. It tests the player both physically and mentally.

    /mats

  10. #10
    Regular Member chris-ccc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    26,849
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Lightbulb To shorten the point scoring system in 3rd set (rubber set)

    Quote Originally Posted by wisdomcivet View Post
    Personally, I would prefer to shorten the point scoring system in 3rd set (rubber set):

    A game shall be won by the side which first scores 21 points for the game. This should apply to the first 2 games.

    For the rubber set, a game shall be won by the side which first scores 12 points for the third game:
    Players shall change ends when a side first scores 6 points in third game.
    If the score becomes 11-all, the side which gains a two point lead first, shall win that game.
    If the score becomes 20-all, the side scoring the 21st point shall win that game.

    I come out with this idea as we had seen a lot of players unable to perform well and makes the games look dull and less excited during rubber set.
    .
    If BWF follows this scoring system, then it should be OK. Otherwise, I, as a coach, will not find a common training system for trainees (in tactical ways to play a match) - Playing this tournament, you do this; playing that tournament, you do that.

    With different scoring systems for different tournaments, participants can get confused.
    Quote Originally Posted by wisdomcivet View Post
    Also for the serving part, I think the players should be given 2nd chance to do the serve after the 1st fault serve. Else sometimes the game may end up not because of rally winning by the players' effort but due to numerous service errors.
    This, I disagree.

    IMHO, it would make/allow players to slacken off in training to perform their Service properly (in their first stroke/shot of a rally).
    .
    Last edited by chris-ccc; 02-15-2011 at 08:13 AM.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    NorCal, United States
    Posts
    939
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I disagree with both of these ideas. The third game defeats the purpose of players training to have enough stamina to keep up in the 3rd set, it pushes them harder in training so that they can last longer in games.

    As for service, I see what you mean, however, it just places more emphasis that you need to make your service over and that service is the key in matches. A little slip up could cause you the match.

  12. #12
    Regular Member chris-ccc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    26,849
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Thumbs up The 'Best of 3 games; each to 21 points' is good and working well

    .
    In this thread, I am not certain where we are heading to.

    To me, the current BWF's system: 'Best of 3 games, each to 21 points (if a 20-all does not happen)' is good and working well.

    Any attempt to change this scoring system will just add confusion to our players, coaches, tournament organisers, etc......
    .

  13. #13
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Western Hemisphere
    Posts
    1,078
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I agree with the other poster that the rules of badminton should not be made to accommodate the lack of stamina.

    I hate the second service rule in tennis and certainly don't want to see it badminton. It removes elements of suspense and breaks the flow of the game.

    The most exciting part of the game is always the end game. That's why I like 11x5. There would be no more fooling around before the 11-point break. Players will be forced to be ready and sharp from the get-go.

    This system will also naturally morph into 11x3 for recreational level players.

Similar Threads

  1. 3x21 rally vs. 3x15 service vs. 3x15 rally scoring system
    By kwun in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / Officiating
    Replies: 160
    : 10-26-2014, 09:36 PM
  2. 21 rally-point scoring system: Is it really better to Attack?
    By chris-ccc in forum Techniques / Training
    Replies: 448
    : 11-24-2011, 09:16 AM
  3. 21 Rally Point Scoring System
    By Break-My-String in forum Coaching Forum
    Replies: 0
    : 11-08-2006, 06:47 AM
  4. New Scoring System (21-Rally point system)
    By MikeJ in forum Jonas Rasmussen Forum
    Replies: 21
    : 06-05-2006, 07:03 AM
  5. Mixed responses to 21-point rally scoring system
    By ants in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / Officiating
    Replies: 50
    : 04-26-2006, 05:40 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
  •