There is a kernel of truth to it - the current consensus, as far as I'm aware, is that we are born with a certain ratio of muscle Fibre types and that ratio will not change in a significant manner, or at least not towards fast-twitch fibres. So yes, to an extent you can judge how fast a player may become. The flip side is - badminton isn't sprinting. Youre not looking for the gifted among the fastest percent. There's so many other aspects to badminton that goigg by pure speed alone as a dominant or sole parameter, you're sure to exclude a lot of potentially great players. There's fast players again and again that just aren't special. Anybody remember that Japanese guy? I can't remember his name rn, but he was an insanely quick singles player, switched over to doubles, is now coaching (Shoji Sato?). He was never truly special as a player because other parts of his game weren't up to par. He was faster than LD, faster than Taufik, faster than Gade. He couldn't even get close to their achievements. This isnt an attack on him, not at all, it just goes to show that speed alone isn't going to show what a badminton player is capable of. Since we're in the Indian thread, let me give you an Indian example. I'd rather put a really good athletic coach on B Sai Praneeth, a slow, unathletic player by elite standards, than put my eggs in the basket that is Lakshya Sen (sorry if I misspelled that one). The latter is undoubtedly quicker, but hasn't shown much beyond speed and gritty determination. His technique is limited, he doesn't seem to have any special shot, he doesn't seem to be tactically aware. Being athletic is already more than just being speedy. Being a good (or great) badminton player is even more than that. On a side note, since you brought up that selection process - early development programs and elite sports schools have been shown to be shockingly ineffective. There have been studies over here (with football players) that have shown that a kid training somewhat seriously (2-3x weekly) at a good local club will not be as good as the kid going to an elite boarding school, but will (on average, or correcting for talent) not fall further behind either. They can actually catch up at any point in time when they start taking their training more seriously at a later stage (say, 16-18yo). The most rewarding approach for the overall development of a kid (athletically/physically) actually seems to be to play several different sports with varying needs and challenges until an age of about 14, when most motor skills are pretty set, to develop as much coordinative skills as possible. Sorry for long post. It's a very interesting topic to me
Agree with you on this. He was good at junior level. But seems to be struggling at senior level. His gameplay is very monotonous. His opponents know what he'll do in the next shot. I hope to see a better Lakshya Sen in future as he's just shifted to senior level so it'll take time to adjust.
Nice to see Rahul BM Bharadwaj to win against Ren Pengbo in three tight games. He's not the same after coming back from injury. Prakash Padukone once mentioned in an article (I guess 3-4 years ago) that Lakshya Sen, Meiraba Luwang, Rahul BM Bharadwaj and Kartikey Gulshan Kumar are the next generation players. Out of the four, Kartikey Gulshan Kumar is having the worst experience, Rahul has potential but its too early to expect from him. Meiraba has to be mentally strong and capitalise on his strengths.
To cut a long story short. You don’t necessarily agree that tactics is coachable and speed is uncoachable. And I don’t necessarily agree that tactics is uncoachable and speed is coachable. Slow players can be made more tactically astute as can tactically naive players be made faster. At the end of the day, no one agrees that anything should be set in stone. Happy to agree to disagree
Didn't say that tactics are uncoachable. I'm saying that whether a player can be coached tactically is unpredictable, some can be, some can't. I'm also of the opinion that being speedy at a junior level is not a sure sign of great potential, but nothing more than a slight advantage over others.
@j4ckie Regarding the junior development, I do agree with you and I am have reservations about the emphasis that HK elite junior coaches have. I am not sure of their reasons but yes we do see plenty of examples who have ‘upset’ the system and others who are late maturers. It’s definitely an imperfect science and subject to many variables so perhaps they have made it easier for themselves by emphasising certain criteria. They do say, if there is a junior who gets into top four place in the HK championship competition, that’s another route into selection - my kid did this route despite being deemed not good enough by the assessment test four months earlier. I think I will not argue about speed versus skills at the very elite level because I mentioned those issues in context of junior players selection - not professionals matching up against each other.
Ishaan/Tanisha lost to no. 1 seeds Indonesians Leo/Jamil (current AJC champions) in three games. Throughout the match, they were on par with Indonesians or 55-45 in favour of India but they have a very bad habit of conceding points and not having the ability to finish the points. At some moments , they defended very well. At other moments, they were miserable in converting the points. From 11-14 down in second game to 16-14 up and then 16-18 down to 16-21 down. They lose the second game. Mistakes and errors have been committed by Indian pair a lot. If we don't capitalise, these types of pairs will harm us the Koreans, Indonesians, Chinese and Thai pairs. In the decider Indian pair lead 13-7 and 17-14 up but they lost 7 consecutive points to lose 21-17. I daresay Ishaan is a better XD player than Satwik because he knows how XD should be played. Satwik is all about power. That's why he should be partnered with Tanisha who is a solid doubles player. She's brave when to use drop shots which caught off guard Indonesians many times, has good front court play too, smashes well. This pair has good defence. They have potential, but need to be grounded and improve faster. We may very well have found a XD pair which can do well in future. This is a new pair and with more playing time, I'm sure they'll do well. Only problem is they are making mistakes in crucial moments.
Almost all Indian players make a lot of mistakes for a professional level. Even Srikanth used to make too many unforced errors even when he is in peak form in 2017. The way Sindhu lost lo HBJ in semifinals of India open is also thanks to errors. May be mindset change is needed.
If there is one Indian player who is very mentally strong that is Saina. She may not be technically best or good but she fights her way back with grit and determination.
This JWC is an eye open for all the fans to not keep any hopes on these next generation players. Quite sad watching the match between Udaykumar/Sara vs Feng/Lin 18-6 .
It’s good you brought her name up. Her mental strength and determination is right up there at the very top. Being light on her feet and quick twisting body movements are less natural for her. But hey, she is a top player and consistently so.
I found her and Schenk to be very similar in the sense that neither was an aesthetically pleasing player (to me) or naturally gifted (in a technical sense), but both were/are unbelievable fighters and almost never gave up before the umpire called the match
Is this india’s best junior squad? I thought they have really promising players like Gopichand, Jakkareddy and Samiya. Sorry I don’t know their full names. And there was a player last year called Priyanka. Were they not selected? Politics or poor form?
JakkaReddy was not selected due to politics I guess. She trains in Thailand and didn't participate in qualification tournament for WJC. Gayathri, Samiya also didn't participate in qualification tournament and focussed on senior tournaments. In GS u19, we fielded 14 yo Tasnim Mir, relatively weak player like Trisha Hegde and Aditi Bhatt (who also plays doubles). We had our best bet on Samiya. In BS u19, Meiraba was expected to reach quarters as he has potential but he seems to be lacking the x factor / killer instinct in his game. He lost to Su Li Yang (who also plays doubles) twice in team event and individual events. Priyanshu Rajawat was our second best bet but he also skipped Qualifiers and focussed on seniors. In GD u19, we have our best pair Aditi / Tanisha (both 16 yo). I hope to see them improve in future. In BD u19, our best pair Manjit/Dingku are weak and not yet a dominant pair. In XD u19, we had our best pair Ishaan/ Tanisha who gave a scare to top seeds Indonesians. That's the story of our squad. Plus the coaches said before this tournament that this year WJC is just for exposure. Makes me think are we so complacent that we don't give too much importance to WJC, Thomas and Uber Cups.
They are our best pair in junior level. But weak in terms of international level. Manjit/Dingku losing to Japanese pair in two games in just 26 mins, how come that performance makes you think they played quite well ? Plus they lost to the Taipei pair. As of now, they aren't reliable and are weaker than Dhruv/ Krishna, Podile when they were in junior level. Scope for improvement, I guess yes but not that hopeful of them.
Kunlavut case is different. He's bidding to win third consecutive WJC. Lakshya is focussing on seniors which I think is good as he's played juniors for many years. Ashmita is past the junior age category.
S Sorry, I followed their match against Chinese Taipei. They lost in 3 close games although they looked better than the opponents.
