can you get 3 points continuously for 15 sets? you versus me and aspire if you can't, the bet is on if you can, we loose to you now
Simon did won his match to LD, although LD was injured at 2nd set. It was Swiss Open SS, 2007 Semi Final.
Stop pulling my leg uncle OTB. No matter how frequent I play I am just an amateur. You could be a member of the 67' Malaysia Thomas Cup winning team! 15 sets?!!:crying: I surrender now.
Off topic: Gentlemen, do not get conned by OTB. From what I gather, He used to play with the top junior in Canada and beat those young lads convincingly:crying::crying:. I think giving a 12 points cushion and 3 service serve is a big no no, unless you guys can play like LD.
Imagine doing away with the BWF ranking system and start by using H2H ranking system. I could not imagine how chaotic and confusing the ranking is going to be. H2H will only work if each player registered under BWF(more than 700 of them) play against each other for quite some no of games. This is impossible to achieved. The debate was able to carry on because alot of the H2H ranking calculation proposed by the OP was based on the current BWF world ranking(base on the current top ten players in BWF ranking). If you think that current BWF ranking system is flawed, how could some other ranking system(H2H) that built upon this flawed basis be considered better? And can you imagine how chaotic the situation is, once we get rid of current system and start adopting the H2H where every player has to start from scratch? All we left is a bunch of players with random Win/Loss pattern and whoever that can come up with a sound ranking out of that random sample would be the greates genius in the 21st century(no, I am serious). At that point, people would have to resolve to see who wins more titles to comeup with a unbiased/less confusing ranking system which is what we have now(the more titles you have, you more likely you came on top)-the BWF ranking system. Sorry to come up as harsh but unless you guys(not implying you, chris-ccc) can come up with a thoroughly devised scientific ranking system. The BWF ranking system will remain as the best ranking system we currently have. Forget about the H2H thing, because if that H2H does not build on the current BWF ranking system, it carries very little significance(Unless you are managing a betting company) to tell us who is the best player. However, H2H can give us a little indication on who is the better player among that 2 particular players.
head to head for ranking? Lin Dan and Lee Chong Wei, both have not beaten me. i am world ranking number 1 now. can?
One last off topic post, apology to the Mods....you guys flattered me, I need to find a place to hide my face....I last played in KL in SBA hall 30+ yrs ago, I sure would like to play in KL once again, the competition is sure fun there...only problem, I am in Canada, and ain't retired yet, maybe a few more years, by then my game will down the pits and I know and respect how good the malaysian players are in SBA hall, you guys are good.
the debate seems going to nowhere... just go too picky and with too much obsession on many unconscious pre-occupation... like I said, if you look for a 100% perfert scientific system to determine who's the best player, no one here could do. coz you need tons of scientist to work across time (for arguments on players' different ages), space (for arguments on matches on various geographical locaions that could lead to food poison), physiobiology (for arguments of matches with different fatigue status of players), medicine (for arguments on who was playing with injuries and not), etc. to have a weighted index to come on top of all ranking suggestions. like I also said before, LCW is the only player that could beat LD at least once every year, so LCW beating LD is nothing new. But LD also being beat by at least 2-3 various players every year, and LD also still holding a winning H2H record over all top 10 players every year including LCW. so whilst it's hard fact that LCW won the latest match, do you really think that the LCW would from now on win every match over LD? simple question: if the top 10 players now play a league, say LD play LCW once every month, say 12 times a year now, which one do you think / feel would win more matches? or allow LD to play with LCW in every WC / OG final, say for consecutively 10 years, which one do you think would win the more times? in reality, it's impossible to have this happen as there are too many other factors, so don't side-track to drag on this. but just answer it in 5 seconds with your gut feeling...
heh if lcw play LD once every month...i can see the first three goes to LD and after that it slowly goes to lcw favour...after that i somehow cant see lcw ever lose to LD anymore...just my bias gut feeling xD
If LD were to play LCW once every month from now on...... . My gut feeling is that if LD were to play LCW once every month from now on, their H2H ratio could be 50:50. When LD was playing less often than LCW at tornaments, LD appeared to be fresher whenever they meet. That was because LD participation rate was only around half of LCW. Could it be said that; * LD was twice as fresh as LCW, and/or * LCW was twice as tired as LD? It's only my gut feeling. .
