not done posting yet. if fu/cai did loses to lyb/tby, he should be a considered a failure and should be totally ashamed because he can't produce a MD pair that he taught everything he knew about doubles, plus extra knowledge from many other coaches (tangfu, etc), and better nutrients and conditioning. This example is just to address lyb/tby vs fu/cai comparsion, not fu/cai vs kido/setiawan or other current MD pairs for those nay sayers, u prolly have an excuse for my prediction. If fu/cai did win over lyb/tby, you nayers will say, the match was fixed LOL
I don't think Sonnymak is using the dubious A>B, B>C then A>C "logic". His point is, the fact that CTF/LWW (and also Candra/Tony) still can match young pairs in 2007, when they were already around 30, shows that there is no big difference in physical ability between current players and players 10 years ago. TH cannot beat LCW now because TH is much slower now than himself in 2004. Are you saying TH in 2004 will not be able to match LCW today? Note: even today's PG, at age 33, considerably slower than 10 years ago, can still beat LCW once in a while and push LD to the limit.
If you just pull LYB/TBY from 1990 and throw them on court, I agree that CY/FHF will beat them easily. However, things may change a lot if we give LBY/TBY several months to get used to the current styles and pace. LYB said he could bench press 130kg while CY(Chen Yu, not Cai Yun)'s 100kg is already among the best in today's team China. Is past player physically inferior to present ones?
no disrespect to PG but lets get real. TH beat PG, then LD fling around TH, and i'm comparing all of them within the same week time framework, not what if's this and that years ago or decades ago. PG to push LD to the limitLOL, maybe in beer drinking or ice water swimming. Are u trying to out do Pjswift in the entertainment dept.?
I really don't think the players of the 80's and early 90's can match the players current time. Even if we give the equipment technology to those of the past, I still don't think the players of the past can beat players of current. Not only are the players of current time stronger, they're also faster and more dynamic.
if lyb from the 1990's is transported into today time period, and let them get used to current life styles and conditioning, i say he'll be worst off. Why? Today life style will make him more 'fat' because of he'll be chauffeured around and eat bon bon, chasing better looking gals of today. Wahahalol u and other nay sayers may say i am joking around? i have the analogue proof, unlike some other people with hollow statement (about me) I pray that lyb doesn't read this thread, and hope LD don't squeal on me
Now see who is using the A>B, B>C then A>C argument. LOL. In 2004 OG (within one week, yeah! ), Susilo beat LD 2:0, Boonsak beat Susilo easily (15:10, 15:1), TH toyed Boonsak (15:9, 15:2). So according to your logic, LD wouldn't even be able to push TH to the limit...
i talk red apple vs red apple. U talk about PG of today and then use 2004 events to back up your comparision. Can u stay still and talk straight? I didn't say LD dominated in 04-05 era did i? I would say a peak LD can beat a peak TH, hands down.
A beat B, B beat C so A should be able to beat C, is a false argument, no matter how close "A beat B" and "B beat C" are. My 2004 OG example is not to "back up" my argument, it's to expose your "logic". Btw, if I remember correctly, you are among those people who always said TH's OG title is "luck" because LD lost early. Or you are not one of those people?
yes, i did say that, not hiding from it. Luck means it help TH, not 100% luck, nothing is 100%. TH still has to run around the court and hit the shuttle around to win. in 04 OG, LD, RS, boonsak are all new to big tournament, did poorly mainly because of inexperience and unsolified mental focus. I said luck meaning TH did not encounter any chinese. If u look at TH record recently, his record against the chineses are terrible. Luck also means stupid OG rules allowing only 3 top players from each country. China can field 4 to 5 chineses in 04 OG if that stupid rule isnt there. That is why TH do lousy in Opens like FO, AE, etc (except INA open of course) because there's no restriction on entry except withdrawal. Show me a TH title from an Open where LD was there..
Btw, I don't see why the rule is stupid. Can Brasil blame the "stupid quota" when their team lost to France in 06 WC? Can they say, we have many many good players, but what the heck we can only field one team!
1. i said exception to INA open 2. ok in one case out of ?? H2H with TH? Does one case disprove that a peak LD can beat a peak TH? i have said before, TH peak years were 04 and 05. Even then, TH didn't dominated LD like LD dominate everybody else today. In 04/05 years, young LD vs peak TH is around 50/50 chance. http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showpost.php?p=259452&postcount=10
There certaintly isn't any contest here. The older generation player did not have the opportunity to reach their top potential. Plus the newer player have the benefit of "knowledge" such as hold and flick, double wrist action etc. I will have to agree that the sheer physical superiority of today's player will overwelm the player of the past, especially in men singles. It doesn't even have to be a endurance race. Fast player like LCW and Lindan will just reach the net early with a tight spinning net shot, force a short lift and then smash winners.
You must be kidding... This is what you said "That is why TH do lousy in Opens like FO, AE, etc (except INA open of course) because there's no restriction on entry except withdrawal. Show me a TH title from an Open where LD was there.." The "(except INA open of course)" is effective for both sentences?! 04-05 TH vs LD is 3:1. If we follow your criterion and take away those matches in Indonesia and China, it's 2:0. How come it's 50-50?! Let's say 3:1(2:0) indeed is close to 50-50 . Now take a look at LD vs LCW. LD vs LCW in 2008 is 3:1 (Swiss, Thomas, OG, China). If we take away those matches held in China and Malaysia, it's 1:1; LD vs LCW in 2009 is 3:1 (AE, Swiss, Sudirman, China Masters). If we take away those held in China and Malaysia, it's again 1:1. So LD vs LCW should be like 45-55, right?
Actually I never did so. You should read my posts more carefully. My argument is as follows. First, everyone knows, if A is much superior to B in speed/power, there is no way B can match A. Now suppose there is evidence showing that A and B have close matches. Conclusion: There cannot be huge gap between A and B in speed/power. Solid logic.
explain why TH, the super magician, can not win an AE? or a superseries (yet) even when LD isn't there? Even uncle Peter gade has won a SS before. In big tournaments after 2006, TH often can't get pass the QF.
