21 rally-point scoring system: Is it really better to Attack?

indeed, 1-1 keeps it friendly. nice way to highjack a thread btw. How do you like the coach? is he declared a national hero yet? ( you dó have a dutch coach right? or am i mixing stuff up?)

 

OF COURSE THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS!!! DID YOU NOTICE HOW SHORT THE OTHER MATCHES ARE??!!

 

I am now back at the office after many hours and days at the SIS. Despite the absence of some of the regular top players for both men and women, we enjoyed many closely-fought matches.

You caught me on this one! I did not pay much attention to this particular aspect but as you would already know, in a vast majority of the matches, the player would elect to serve instead of choosing court.

It is true that a bad serve will lend the player in deep trouble and perhaps a point, but he has the psychological advantage that the shuttle is in his hands and he is in control. He can choose to serve low or high, to the side lines or the centre. And if he really served a good one, he can anticipate for a kill!

 

To start off with, the Danes have always been known to be very tough and the men particularly so in this SO.

KJ seems to have a psychological edge over CH, despite the latter's familiarity with the Singapore conditions and his popularity with the Singapore fans, his having won the SO a number of times in the past. And KJ, just like PG, is an attacking player, fast, adept and skilful!

Against CH, KJ never really gave him much chance to attack. KJ took the initiative instead and had CH scurrying all over the court. And KJ himself had to work hard but his "never-say-die" attitude survived and visibly riled his opponent! This is possible because his technical skill is no less inferior to CH's. That's why the match lasted slightly more than an hour in 3 games, 25-23, 19-21, 21-16. You could guess from the third game that CH was mentally distraught and weakened by KJ's robustness and "what-you-can-do-I-can-do better" response!

However, the reverse is true of PG versus KJ. Somehow, PG is always confident and gives the impression right from the beginning that KJ is his inferior! This pschological advantage is a great boost to PG's total annihilation of the helpless KJ in the final as the score of 21-10, 21-14 in merely 35 min demonstrated. Having been teammates for such a long time and KJ playing second fiddle most times, PG knows KJ's game inside out and really capitalized on it.

So, as I've said, technical skills aside, it is the mental toughness and psychology that mattered in the end!

 

the idea behind the NSS that attacking play will win is that attacking play is more tiring but more effective. Now that you don't have to worry about getting as tired you can attack more therefore being more effective.

 

very good summary loh.
both pg and kj received the most satisfaction from beating their chinese counterparts. PG vs KJ is a moot point, both know how each other play and where they stand in comparison.

 

under the nss, imo, receiving is better than serving in all catergories, singles and doubles

WHY?

by serving, u r letting ur opponent to attack first LOL

 

Peter Gade defeats Bao Chunlai in dramatic Semi-Final

Here are some pics of the encounter which PG won 21-15, 16-21, 21-17 in 1 hr 3 min. It deserved to be the Final.

When KJ was playing CH in the other semi-final, everyone was hoping that CH would beat KJ to make the final a non-all Demark affair. As it turned out, both the China players were not good enough on the day and the fans had to endure a boring MS Final as a result! :

 

bro Loh ....... any pics for Mixed double final ?

 

Of course, I have responded to your request under the thread "Singapore Open 2006 Final". Enjoy!

 

Not necessarily true!

Only if you execute a poor serve, ie, a low serve more than an inch higher than the tape! No doubt your opponent will stand as close to the net as possible, but he needs to be very fast, confident and accurate to tap at your serve and make a kill. Otherwise he kills himself by hitting into the net.

Exponents of the low serve have made it more difficult for the receiver to kill the shot and they're getting better each time. It's all in the mind that you can carry the shuttle just above the net at its highest point through incessant practice. Placing the shuttle where you want it at different parts of the forecourt. And if the receiver becomes too adventurous, he will be stopped dead in his tracks when a very fast and sufficiently high flick serve was suddenly executed! I'm sure you've seen this sometimes even at top-class matches.

As I have said, the receiver has the psychological advantage that he has the bird under control, in his hands and it is up to him to dictate the pace and direction of the start.

 

my opinion is that it doesn't favour attacking or defensive players i can only see an advantage to those of us who are really quick out and are at our best at the start of the game compared to others who like ot assess there opponant and then in the later stages of the match really start playing

the only problem i see with this is that for local tournaments where we dont get the help of a scorer i lost the score so many times, but not only that in national U17 tournaments around the UK you dont get a scorer so if they implemented it there then i think some confusion will occur

 

Please allow me to add on to these points.

I agree that receiver may not always attack at first shot, but doesn't this show that he can either choose to attack or not to? Let's look back at the server, does he has the option of attacking when serving?

 

Re your last para, do you mean the server?

 

I think in low level games the receiver could capitalize on mediocre serves. However, at intermediate and higher level games the tide changes to favour the server. How can you attack a serve when it is never your option? It is the server who dictates the moves, and that includes what the server wants the receiver to do.
One way to find out if this is true is to keep an eye on all Open Championships that now use the NSS. All you need to do is to find out if the winner of the toss opts to serve or to receive.

 

You have yet answer my questions, which is

1) Do you agree that the receiver has the TWO options of attacking and not to, no matter how the service is 'dictated' by the server?

2) Do you agree that the server does not have attacking option when serving?

No one in this world can guarantee that your shuttlecock will always pass over the net nicely and drop at the spots you want it to be all the time, (and please don't ever bring in physics projectory theories into badminton AGAIN), SPORTS are one thing that cannot 100% be determined by science. Human errors, conditions of courts, stadium, jet-lagged, shuttlecocks, crowds, shirts, rackets and so MANY THINGS can affect how a player performs, not mentioning serving yet! So how can you ensure that you can always 'dictate' the shuttlecocks as you wish???

Another thing is, please provide with more convincing statistics that most players are still opting to serve first in this NSS. In OSS, your statement might be true because the server can earn the first point when win but lose nothing except for service when losing, so most likely the players choose for serving first.

For now, I don't know anything yet, just only few months, do these enough for you to make conclusions now? Moreoever, there are other factors for choosing to serve first or not, which is the condition of court, the crowds, the wind etc. If you are not aware of these, please go and train harder. All these cannot be found in your Han Jian's books!