I think the preference depends on demographics. For instance, in SoCal, no one I know plays the NSS unless they are preparing for tournaments. Everyone is using the OSS here.
they also used it in the World Cup in December 2005. that was the first major tournament to use the NSS.
1st NSS @Yiyang, Hunan, China December 2005 Sorry kwun, Yes I have forgotten the first NSS used @Yiyang, Hunan, China, December 2005. There, Lin Dan beat Ponsana Boonsak 21-13, 21-11. And, Xie Xingfang beat Zhang Ning 21-19, 21-16. And at that time, in Dec-2005, we thought a younger, faster, more aggressive and more powerful player will have a definite advantage in the NSS over a older, slower, less aggressive and less powerful player. But since then, Zhang Ning has beaten Xie Xingfang in the epic/marathon Japan Open 2006, 21-11, 16-21, 30-29 !!!. Zhang Ning has proven that we should not be afraid of younger players. Skills and tactics (other than stamina and age) still have a big role to play under the NSS. Cheers... chris@ccc
both systems are fun to play but the OSS gets my vote because it allows me to stay on court much longer
Sorry, completely disagree, you are giving one example and that game could have gone either way. Just happens Zhang Ning won with a smash down the line 2" from being out. What if it went out? XXF would have won, then what would you say? You look at how Men's Doubles has changed. Prior to the NSS, it was more fun, long rallies with smashing and defending. Now it's a drive and push-fest. Not nearly as entertaining (at least for me). Pre-NSS, players would go for more shots, especially when they were serving because they knew if they missed, it would just be service over, not point to the opponents.
I seriously do not think that the new system would in any way change badminton into a different game. Like what chris said, skills and tactics still play a big role. Every single rally counts. The only exception would probably be that it requires less stamina than the old system, but that could be changed by adding more matches? The main problem is just the unpredictable time factor. Matches could theoretically last forever, and TV companies have their schedules to keep. The NSS just fixes that, although I guess it could do better with maximum of 5 games instead of 3, which makes a long drawn out battle almost 2 hours.
Zhang defends Japan Open title in thriller @Tokyo 2006 Hi DinkAlot, For those who have not known/watched that match, please refer to this link = ZN defends JO 2006 title in thriller From that link, we should read carefully what the article said; ====== start (part of article) ====== "At 16-19 down in the final game, I tried to keep myself calm and concentrated on each shot. That was the key to the victory. I was able to finish off by playing aggressively at the end," said a jubilant Zhang. Zhang had a chance to win at 22-21 in the last, but Xie scraped through after a long rally. Neither could build a two-point lead and the match was abruptly settled by a Zhang smash at 29-all, when under new scoring rules the next point wins. "Whenever I rushed, I made too many mistakes and both were very tired at the end of the match. But in the final game, I was able to hit the shuttle calmly. It decided the winner," Zhang said Sunday. The 75-minute win was revenge for Zhang, who lost to Xie in the world final and at the last two All England finals. She now edges her in the head-to-heads at 10-9. ====== end (part of aticle) ====== ZN said that we don't have to rush in the NSS. We can still win in the NSS in a Cool, Calm, Collected manner. And for those who do not know, we have tried to analyse/examine the NSS(Singles Match). Please refer to this link = NSS: Is it really better to attack? At the end of the thread, we found more and more Singles Matches were lasting more than 60 minutes. And more and more players were playing Singles in the NSS in a Cool, Calm, Collected way. Yes, for the Doubles Matches, I agree with you that aggressive and fast pace tactics are employed with greater success. But, pre-NSS, aggressive and fast pace tactics were most commonly used anyway. Conclusion: The NSS has not really changed the way we play/enjoy Badminton, but it has become more media-friendly. Cheers... chris@ccc
OSS is the way to go. It is classic, like vintage wine. NSS? From which hole did this new animal crawled out from? Smash, smash, smash, and it is all over. Bored to death. Just not worth getting out of bed for it.
About the way it's played, that's your opinion, not mine. When I play the NSS, I certainly change tactics (a bit) as do everyone I know. With respect to media-friendly, I'm not certain but am definitely inclined to agree.
Let's see, I didn't really like the new system at first, but after playing it over the past 8 months, I don't think I could go back to the old system. For me it was a refreshing change in the game, made it different and maybe even a little more interseting. So that's a vote for the new system right here
I agree with this, but not for the reason you quote. When someone who has adapted to NSS is made to play OSS, I have noticed that invariably the following happens: if they jump out to a lead, say 7-3, or 10-5, or something, then they hit a wall, and seem completely unable to put the game away. It is as though they are just hanging on, hanging on, waiting for 21 to roll around so they can walk off in victory. They have forgotten what they used to know about the extra effort that it takes to win. No offence, but the OSS separates the men from the boys.
What do you think about tennis, in particular about the SS it uses, is it media-friendly? Why don't they change the SS to make the match time more predictable? I guess what you may answer: there is no need for them to change anything, as it is already very popular. Yes, it is true... Then, the next question: how did they manage to achieve such a popularity with a very media-unfriendly scoring system? Doesn't it mean that the sport's popularity can be raised up without changing the SS, even if it is not very media-friendly?
Scoring system in Tennis has changed too Hi Dmitry, There were a lot of changes in the scoring system in Tennis that you might not know. Before Tennis introduced the Tie Breaker Scoring System, so that it can be more media-friendly, one Tennis Match could last for more than one day. And, spectators have to return the next day to witness the end result. I am talking back in the 1960's and 1970's. Cheers... chris@ccc
Perhaps badminton can use the NSS to build up it's media reputation first. After that, OSS might make a comeback once it gets Tennis-like reputation... one day...
Your arguments are valid, except for one point: Tennis is already very popular in most parts of the world. On the other hand, except for certain European countries and parts of Asia, I wouldnt say badminton has reached the same level, in terms of public intrest and opinion. This means that in order for the sport to gain more coverage, it has to adopt more "media-friendly" things so that networks are willing to carry tournaments. This includes the NSS. That being said, I'm not sure I agree that the game of badminton has not changed when the scoring system changed. Certainly, I've noticed a stark difference in professional mens doubles play, with other (albeit less noticible) changes throughout in other games. In my opinion, the NSS has changed the way players play the game (as any change as big a changing the scoring system should), it does not remove the skill, or favor certain types of players. It's just different.
My 2 cents-Talk abt playing time & injury factors in NSS... ..speaking of which, i remember last yr, sometime during the Thomas&Uber Cup tournament, BWF(Mr. Gunalan) mentioned that the NSS will make "the matches run shorter, less injuries, more media friendly", something to those effects. But after looking at the NSS-based results so far, well: 1. matches still run as long as the previous OSS, 2. injuries are no less than when they were still using OSS. 3. Media friendly?? Sure the matches have become a bit more intense & dramatic, but I don't really know how"friendly" it has become. Hmm, also i think we're still relying on selective tv broadcast, esp. for us who have to rely on internet webcast(which i'm sure you guys who rely on webcasts know how it works ).. :crying: The only difference i notice, when watching pros, in using the NSS is probably the slight frequency of upsets between top ranked players and lower ranked players. Upsets which usually don't occur when those players meet under the OSS. I know the NSS is still quite early in its infancy and i'm sure many people(non-pros) still haven't tried or use it. I would say, perhaps by next yr, kwun might do another poll on this topic. And see where us BC members stand by then. *If need be, I can search & provide those articles which i've quoted.
