Indosiar will broadcast Badminton matches. The official broadcaster of Asian Games in Indonesia is Emtek Group (SCTV & Indosiar). Emtek Group share their broadcast right with 2 other TV stations as 1 consortium. TVRI is one of the others 2 TVs which also broadcast Asian Games including the opening and closing ceremony.
And Nexmedia for pay TV, remembered how they're so lame as Rio OG official broadcaster. I prefer TVRI than those low standard TV stations.
Well, AsianGames is the biggest event of the year. Its paramount that any badminton players get this once every four years event. China and Indonesia are the defending champions of the 5 disciplines.
Nope, see post #73 as Master has shared it. TEAM Event : 16th August INDIVIDUAL Event : 22nd August Their photos are outdated
Well, I'm glad that TTY has a chance at a big title so soon after losing at the WC. But there's no way an Asian Games title could compare to winning the WC or OG with Marin in the draw.
TTY would beat marin 9 times out of 10 so yes winning gold medal in WS is a legendary achievement.Imo AG gold is second only to the OG in all badminton disciplines.
Prestige also depends on the players competing in the tournament. If the AG women's singles is missing Marin (winner of four of the last five WC/OG events), then that category is diminished. The results will be more meaningful in the other divisions. And I am not a Marin fan (far from it), but that's how I see it.
what if Federer, Nadal, Djokovic and Murray all withdraw from Wimbledon (for whatever reason), does that change the prestige any? there isn't universal criteria to determine a tournaments importance in any given sport. olympics have been boycotted by major countries in 1980 (USA) and 1984 (Russia). Did that diminish the prestige one iota?
I'd say a Wimbledon title would be tainted somewhat in the minds of tennis fans if all of those players were absent, since they have won 49 of the last 54 Grand Slam titles. But at least if they were all injured at the same time, the conclusion would have to be that it was unfortunate they weren't there but that injuries are a part of sport. Wimbledon is still a truly international competition open to every great player. The AG is not. And the AG's prestige in badminton rests solely on the fact that the winners in every category have traditionally been the very best players in the world and the same players that also win world championships or Olympic gold - Lin Dan, Wang Yihan, Zhang Nan, Kido/Setiawan, etc. How important would the AG be if every nation in Europe took badminton as seriously as Denmark does and you had great players in all categories from Germany, France, Spain, and the UK? The situation is similar in table tennis. Who cares that the Europeans aren't there when the Chinese are so clearly superior to everyone worldwide? By contrast, what prestige does the AG have in tennis? Zilch. It's basically like a challenger-level tournament. Of course, whoever wins the AG in badminton women's singles this year will have had to beat some very good players since 11 of the top 12 in the world will be there. But we all known Marin isn't just another player. She's not just some token non-Asian in the top 10. She arguably has the greatest record at WC/OG in the history of WS and she's coming off a totally dominating performance in Nanjing where she just wiped the floor with great players like Saina and Sindhu. Surely it would have to be more satisfying for TTY and her fans for her to beat Marin in a big final of the WC/OG than for her to win the AG.
Asian Games is like Olympic games but regional. Nothing could take away the prestige of it just because non Asian players couldn't take part of it because of one obvious reason. To all Asian athletes to compete and to win medals in AG for their country is all that matters. All England is the Wimbledon in badminton.
what if they were all still entered but slightly injured and they all lost in the 1st or 2nd round? is that still tainted? do you think it would be considered tainted to the winner? which 'fans' care about olympic tennis? serious tennis fans don't because they know the athletes don't. who cares about world championship archery, fencing, handball, curling, etc.? that's the crux of this issue across all sports: what matters to the 'fans' vs. what matters to the athletes. you made your case but haven't convinced me.
I actually have to disagree with both of your points. If the top priority for Asian athletes in every sport was to compete in AG and win medals, then how can you explain why in tennis virtually every big-name Asian tennis player is skipping AG this year so they can focus on the US Open. Japan's Kei Nishikori and South Korea's Hyeon Chung, for example, would have a great chance of winning gold or silver in men's singles, yet neither will be in Indonesia. Naomi Osaki (who represents Japan on the WTA Tour and is one of tennis' top young players) also is skipping the AG. Even more obscure players like Japan's Yoshihito Nishioka, who won gold in MS in the 2014 Asian Games because he didn't have to compete against the best players, is skipping AG this year. So clearly, in tennis, the US Open is a way more prestigious event than the AG. As for your second point, I wish that were true because two of my favorite badminton competitors are TTY and Yuta Watanabe/Arisa Higashino and they won WS and XD, respectively, at the All England. But it seems like most badminton fans are still saying that those players are still without a major title. Many badminton fans also say that LCW is without a major title despite all of his achievements, including 4 All England Open titles. So I have to conclude that the World Championships/Olympic Games is the Wimbledon of badminton.
I agree that a Wimbledon title would be a huge achievement, probably the highlight of anyone's career, no matter the circumstances. I said "tainted somewhat" only because the scenario you gave me was where literally ALL of the most important men's players of the last 15 years were absent from the tournament. The only way I could see Wimbledon's prestige being reduced would be if new rules were instituted that prevented certain players - particularly the highest ranked players - from participating. As for the issue of "what matters to the fans vs. what matters to the athletes," from my experience in sports "what matters" is nearly always the same for both parties. One rare exception was TTY deciding that the Universiade was more important to her than the 2017 WC. I thought at the time that that was a bad decision and I know a lot of her other fans agree with me. Certainly, winning the Universiade did nothing for her legacy in badminton. Maybe there were other benefits that made it worthwhile for her. In tennis, what matters above all else to the players and to the fans of those players are the 4 Grand Slam tournaments. In badminton, it's clear to me that what matters most is the WC/Olympics. AG is a big event in badminton and other sports (though clearly not all sports), I'm not denying that, but it simply cannot be on the same level with WC/Oly precisely because of the possibility that someone who would be a huge title contender - like Marin - is not allowed to play.
