2014 Li-Ning BWF WORLD Championships : Day-6 (30th August 2014) - SEMIFINALS

[mindreader]

I don't agree, because CL not only faces LCW, but other players too. So you have to look at the whole records. The H2H is not the ultimate truth. For example, LD had problems playing Park, a quite average player.
For the 13 WC, what was said about LD's style only emphasize his tactical skills.

Uh what? Park? As in Park Sung-hwan? So Lin Dan loses to Park Sung-hwan once in a major tournament and all of a sudden he's got a problem? Lin Dan has a 13-4 record against him. I wouldn't exactly call that much of a problem.

 

[renbo]

Uh what? Park? As in Park Sung-hwan? So Lin Dan loses to Park Sung-hwan once in a major tournament and all of a sudden he's got a problem? Lin Dan has a 13-4 record against him. I wouldn't exactly call that much of a problem.

13-4 is a winning H2H, but the ratio is much higher then what the level of Park would normally get, considering his ranking and global results.
Generally speaking, most of the players, I would say, have some opponents they find difficult, though they might not be the better ranked. As an example, A could be uncomfortable with B who is uncomfortable with C. A, on the other side, might find it easy against C.

 

[renbo]

I don't know why you responded to me. I said, and I'm saying, Lin Dan is the superior player, technically or otherwise.

When I said Lin Dan was "a step behind," it was against his usual self. Let's admit it, Lin Dan's timing at the World Championship 2013 was way off. He hit into the net at least nine or ten times. Those aren't mistakes he would make repeatedly if he had actually played instead of taking six months off.

Despite that, I said Lin Dan dictated the match and that one could get quite comfortable he was going to pull through in the end, because his court control and understanding of the game (both skills) is far superior to Lee Chong Wei.

It was in response to renbo's assertion that Lee Chong Wei is the technically more superior player and his only problem is mental.

You didn't get my argument.

 

[lippro]

13-4 is a winning H2H, but the ratio is much higher then what the level of Park would normally get, considering his ranking and global results.
Generally speaking, most of the players, I would say, have some opponents they find difficult, though they might not be the better ranked. As an example, A could be uncomfortable with B who is uncomfortable with C. A, on the other side, might find it easy against C.

But then again, what you are saying here, renbo, doesn not at all counter Devendra's argument that H2H is the objective criterion of comparing playing levels between 2 players. Even if Lin Dan faces difficulty playing PHW (which i presume you derived from LD's loss to PHW in WC 2010), the fact of the matter is LD still has an overwhelming winning record against PHW and is therefore the superior player. The same logic goes for LD vs LCW, LD is superior since he wins most of the times, simple, plain, and fair. Unless you want to compare LD and LCW through comparing their performances against a PHW, that LCW is better than LD since he beats PHW more easily, in which case I have nothing to say to you, since whatever I offer would be blocked from your mind by your bias anyway. Cheers.

 

[volcom]

But then again, what you are saying here, renbo, doesn not at all counter Devendra's argument that H2H is the objective criterion of comparing playing levels between 2 players. Even if Lin Dan faces difficulty playing PHW (which i presume you derived from LD's loss to PHW in WC 2010), the fact of the matter is LD still has an overwhelming winning record against PHW and is therefore the superior player. The same logic goes for LD vs LCW, LD is superior since he wins most of the times, simple, plain, and fair. Unless you want to compare LD and LCW through comparing their performances against a PHW, that LCW is better than LD since he beats PHW more easily, in which case I have nothing to say to you, since whatever I offer would be blocked from your mind by your bias anyway. Cheers.

Best quote for the wc 2010 has to be from abedeng who was there that day, LD did not even try to win the game after LCW was amazingly defeated by Taufik in his last hurrah.

 

[mindreader]

13-4 is a winning H2H, but the ratio is much higher then what the level of Park would normally get, considering his ranking and global results.
Generally speaking, most of the players, I would say, have some opponents they find difficult, though they might not be the better ranked. As an example, A could be uncomfortable with B who is uncomfortable with C. A, on the other side, might find it easy against C.

Aside from World Championship 2010, the last time Lin Dan lost against Park Sung-Hwan was in 2007. Back then Lin Dan wasn't nearly the player he had become and the gap between the two is much closer.

As a matter of fact, since that defeat in 2007, up until the World Championship in 2010, Lin Dan compiled eight straight wins against Park Sung-Hwan. He was won three straight subsequent to it.

Know what one calls an 11 to 1 record? A landslide. Had Lin Dan lost to Park not in a World Championship (therefore inexplicably making it more debate worthy, somehow) but a random Premier Super Series, nobody would be BS on how Park gives him "troubles."

 

[renbo]

In 2007 LD was even better then what he became after! In 2009 he begin to be more complete but less dominent.

 

[Jonc108]

Uh what? Park? As in Park Sung-hwan? So Lin Dan loses to Park Sung-hwan once in a major tournament and all of a sudden he's got a problem? Lin Dan has a 13-4 record against him. I wouldn't exactly call that much of a problem.

Aside from World Championship 2010, the last time Lin Dan lost against Park Sung-Hwan was in 2007. Back then Lin Dan wasn't nearly the player he had become and the gap between the two is much closer.

As a matter of fact, since that defeat in 2007, up until the World Championship in 2010, Lin Dan compiled eight straight wins against Park Sung-Hwan. He was won three straight subsequent to it.

Know what one calls an 11 to 1 record? A landslide. Had Lin Dan lost to Park not in a World Championship (therefore inexplicably making it more debate worthy, somehow) but a random Premier Super Series, nobody would be BS on how Park gives him "troubles."

Well said...

I really don't understand the logic of renbo's so-called "Park troubles LD"....

 

[renbo]

There was a lot of three games match with Park. Many encounters proved to be un-smooth. All this considering the level of Park, which was not high. In comparison, LHI enjoyed less success, or about the same, but was a much better player then Park.
To deny that players have different playing relations with different players is denying something obvious.
Regarding the H2H factor, of course it is important to consider it, but also the overall record of the players during a period. For example, the win-loss ration of CL is 30-6, while it is 42-4 for LCW. But their H2H is 9-9.
Anyway, what we are discussing is not the absolute superiority of LD over LCW, which many of the comments here would like to say, but the assertion that in 2011 LCW was the best player ("or just as good", said MF), despite the fact that he lost in the final of the WC, and that this assertion comes from being biased.
I believe it is not a biased view (and that does not deprive LD of anything) and that it is a mental problem that is blocking LCW from getting some of the big ones. And also perhaps the surroundings of LCW that might not prepare him in the best of fashion though I know not much about that.

 

[mindreader]

In 2007 LD was even better then what he became after! In 2009 he begin to be more complete but less dominent.

I believe that just about everybody without a chip on his shoulders would disagree with that statement.

There was a lot of three games match with Park. Many encounters proved to be un-smooth. All this considering the level of Park, which was not high. In comparison, LHI enjoyed less success, or about the same, but was a much better player then Park.
To deny that players have different playing relations with different players is denying something obvious.

This I found to be highly humorous. On one hand, you're able to argue with a straight face that Park gave Lin Dan problems despite the overwhelming record in Lin's favour; while on the other hand you argue Chen Long and Lin Dan's head to head record against Lee Chong Wei can't be used.

Now logic would dictate that if Park gave Lin Dan "troubles" then Chen Long gave Lee Chong Wei troubles and Lin Dan gave Lee Chong Wei more than troubles. But whatever floats your boat, I guess.

Regarding the H2H factor, of course it is important to consider it, but also the overall record of the players during a period. For example, the win-loss ration of CL is 30-6, while it is 42-4 for LCW. But their H2H is 9-9.
Anyway, what we are discussing is not the absolute superiority of LD over LCW, which many of the comments here would like to say, but the assertion that in 2011 LCW was the best player ("or just as good", said MF), despite the fact that he lost in the final of the WC, and that this assertion comes from being biased.
I believe it is not a biased view (and that does not deprive LD of anything) and that it is a mental problem that is blocking LCW from getting some of the big ones. And also perhaps the surroundings of LCW that might not prepare him in the best of fashion though I know not much about that.

Well gee, that wouldn't happened to be because Lee Chong Wei is a 31 year old already at the peak when Chen Long isn't even in his prime yet, now would it.

Check Chen Long's earlier head to head record against Lee Chong Wei? It was atrocious. In recent years it not only evened out a lot, but becoming increasingly in Chen Long's favour.

It's the same BS as when a 21 year old Lin Dan just on the professional circuits was being compared to Taufik Hidayat - defending Olympics winner - back in 2005. I believe nobody is bothering to make the argument that Taufik Hidayat is a superior player nowadays.

P.S. Lee Hyun-Il is five years older than Park Sung-Hwan. When Lin Dan entered his prime, Lee's best days are already way behind him. I was led to believe that made a difference, but I suppose you know better.

 

[renbo]

LD's play in 2007-2008 was unique, and if his now would play against his then, his past version would trash his present state. Everyone who plays badminton would recognize that.
You still don't get my point with Park - perhaps you did not see them play. As for Lee, he was in his prime when LD peaked.
as for the way you talk about my reasoning, you should remain polite. Perhaps you feel uncomfortable with your line of thought?

 

[mindreader]

LD's play in 2007-2008 was unique, and if his now would play against his then, his past version would trash his present state. Everyone who plays badminton would recognize that.
You still don't get my point with Park - perhaps you did not see them play. As for Lee, he was in his prime when LD peaked.
as for the way you talk about my reasoning, you should remain polite. Perhaps you feel uncomfortable with your line of thought?

Well gee, I don't know. I mean, since 2007, the last time Park Sung Hwan, Lin Dan has won two Olympics, three World Championships, an Asian Games, three Asian Championships, an East Asian Games and (if include team games) three Thomas Cups, two Sudirman Cups and another Asian Games gold. From a technical point of view, he read the games better, he controls the games better, his strokes are more varied a MUCH more consistent, his defence improved, his net game improved, when he wants to, he can still inject pace or unload the big one and of course, as seen from the list of wins above, he was able to consistently maintain a top form. Those of us in the real world would call that better.

And my line of reasoning? Oh no I'm perfectly comfortable with them. Every fact is on my side. This isn't one of those Park's playing style or Lin Dan's playing style kind of things. This is one of those the facts and numbers don't back your asinine assertion kind of things. The head to head record, especially since 2007 DON'T back your assertion that Park gave Lin Dan troubles.

You also mentioned that Lin Dan and Park Sung-Hwans games had a lot of "three set games," hmmmm let's see. Out of the 17 games they played, only 4 went to rubber, and it hasn't gone three sets since 2009. In other words, you lied.


Since Lin Dan's last defeat in 2007 where once again, Lin Dan compiled a 11 to 1 record, only, Lin Dan went from trading two-zip victories with Park Sung Hwan to defeating him in three sets to winning outright two-zip. Know what that's called? That's called career progression, as in Lin Dan got better.

Also, want to guess Lee Hyun-Il's head to head record against Lin Dan? It's 14-3 in Lin Dan's favour. So Park Sung-Hwan's who gave troubles to Lin Dan gave Lin Dan one game's worth of troubles over a player who doesn't give him troubles? Hilarious.

And Lee Hyun-Il being in his prime when Lin Dan peaked? Uh what? As in Lee Hyun-Il was in his prime/peaked when Lin Dan was in his prime/peaked? As in a 34 year old player about to retire peaked/was in his prime at the same time as a 30 year old two time defending Olympic Champion?

What has Lee Hyun-Il's done since 2007? He went from being a consistent long-shot contender at major championships to not being one. His best personal record is still bronze in World Championship 2006. All his Thomas Cup, Sudirman Cup and Asian Games medals (other than one) came before May 2008. On what basis is Lee Hyun-Il in his prime when Lin Dan was at his peak? As in, you just lied again.

So once again, this isn't one of those I'm uncomfortable with my thought kind of things. This is one of those you're full of brown stuff kind of things.

 

[renbo]

Well gee, I don't know. I mean, since 2007, the last time Park Sung Hwan, Lin Dan has won two Olympics, three World Championships, an Asian Games, three Asian Championships, an East Asian Games and (if include team games) three Thomas Cups, two Sudirman Cups and another Asian Games gold. From a technical point of view, he read the games better, he controls the games better, his strokes are more varied a MUCH more consistent, his defence improved, his net game improved, when he wants to, he can still inject pace or unload the big one and of course, as seen from the list of wins above, he was able to consistently maintain a top form. Those of us in the real world would call that better.

And my line of reasoning? Oh no I'm perfectly comfortable with them. Every fact is on my side. This isn't one of those Park's playing style or Lin Dan's playing style kind of things. This is one of those the facts and numbers don't back your asinine assertion kind of things. The head to head record, especially since 2007 DON'T back your assertion that Park gave Lin Dan troubles.

You also mentioned that Lin Dan and Park Sung-Hwans games had a lot of "three set games," hmmmm let's see. Out of the 17 games they played, only 4 went to rubber, and it hasn't gone three sets since 2009. In other words, you lied.


Since Lin Dan's last defeat in 2007 where once again, Lin Dan compiled a 11 to 1 record, only, Lin Dan went from trading two-zip victories with Park Sung Hwan to defeating him in three sets to winning outright two-zip. Know what that's called? That's called career progression, as in Lin Dan got better.

Also, want to guess Lee Hyun-Il's head to head record against Lin Dan? It's 14-3 in Lin Dan's favour. So Park Sung-Hwan's who gave troubles to Lin Dan gave Lin Dan one game's worth of troubles over a player who doesn't give him troubles? Hilarious.

And Lee Hyun-Il being in his prime when Lin Dan peaked? Uh what? As in Lee Hyun-Il was in his prime/peaked when Lin Dan was in his prime/peaked? As in a 34 year old player about to retire peaked/was in his prime at the same time as a 30 year old two time defending Olympic Champion?

What has Lee Hyun-Il's done since 2007? He went from being a consistent long-shot contender at major championships to not being one. His best personal record is still bronze in World Championship 2006. All his Thomas Cup, Sudirman Cup and Asian Games medals (other than one) came before May 2008. On what basis is Lee Hyun-Il in his prime when Lin Dan was at his peak? As in, you just lied again.

So once again, this isn't one of those I'm uncomfortable with my thought kind of things. This is one of those you're full of brown stuff kind of things.

Your aggressivity doe not make your point more convincing.
For Park: a three game match against LD is indeed to give him trouble. Not so many player can stretch LD to three games. So four victory and four rubbers on 17 encounters against LD is a verygood record for a player of that level. I don't lie here (or anywhere else)
For Lee, he peaked around 2008, which is the same period then LD.
Lee was then (and later on) a much better player then Park. For some matches between these two to be difficult for LD is only natural (and for some to go on Lee's favor). LD stated on many occasions his admiration of Lee's talent. Contrary to some of his fans, LD is not afraid of praising other players.

 

[lippro]

Why are we talking abt PHW here? Isnt this argument about who was the best player in the WC11 final to start with? Can someone give us here stats of that match (winners, net points, unforced errors,...), the one with more OUTRIGHT points won would be the more skilled then.

 

[mindreader]

Your aggressivity doe not make your point more convincing.
For Park: a three game match against LD is indeed to give him trouble. Not so many player can stretch LD to three games. So four victory and four rubbers on 17 encounters against LD is a verygood record for a player of that level. I don't lie here (or anywhere else)
For Lee, he peaked around 2008, which is the same period then LD.
Lee was then (and later on) a much better player then Park. For some matches between these two to be difficult for LD is only natural (and for some to go on Lee's favor). LD stated on many occasions his admiration of Lee's talent. Contrary to some of his fans, LD is not afraid of praising other players.

No my "aggressivity" does not make my point more convincing. Facts, figures and stats make my point more convincing. You've provide ZERO data on how Park Sung-Hwan gave Lin Dan "troubles" other than what amounted to a lie. And yes, MANY players have taken Lin Dan to three sets, especially EARLY IN HIS CAREER.

You've also provided NO DATA on how Lee Hyun-Il was in his prime post 2007 (or in your words, at the same time as Lin Dan, a ludicrous notion) when ESSENTIALLY ALL his best results occurred BEFORE 2008.

Nor did I disrespect Lee Hyun-Il. No "Lin Dan fan" did. As a matter of fact I admire him for going as long as he did. That's called dedication. You built a straw man and tore it down. More lying I see. What I did say was Lee Hyun-Il's best days were behind him when Lin Dan entered his prime (FACT). What I also did to thrash your pathetic claim otherwise is providing STATS showing he didn't do jack in top tournaments since 2007 (FACT). He couldn't do it at his age and I didn't expect him to do it. That's called an honest assessment.

I also couldn't help but notice how your "argument," or the silliness that I'm sure you think are "arguments" keep getting shorter and shorter as I call out your BS. Let's start with a simple question. If Park Sung-Hwan "gave Lin Dan trouble" whereas Lee Hyun-Il didn't, as you claimed, why is there only a ONE GAME DIFFERENCE in head to head records?

Bottom line: you're wrong. I'm wrong. Anybody else not asking a thrashing would have given up long ago. You lost.

 

[renbo]

Your attitude of lost/win is quite childish. My points are short because I cut all the scrap.
We talk here of Lee (who peaked in 2008) because, though a much better player the Park, he was not more difficult to beat for LD, proving that different styles of play clashes differently, a very sound notion found offensive by some for unknown reasons.
Lippro, what we discussed was the biased/not biased view of MF during the final, saying that at that time LCW was the best player, regardless who might win the final. I understand his point of view and do not find it biased.

 

[mindreader]

Your attitude of lost/win is quite childish. My points are short because I cut all the scrap.
We talk here of Lee (who peaked in 2008) because, though a much better player the Park, he was not more difficult to beat for LD, proving that different styles of play clashes differently, a very sound notion found offensive by some for unknown reasons.
Lippro, what we discussed was the biased/not biased view of MF during the final, saying that at that time LCW was the best player, regardless who might win the final. I understand his point of view and do not find it biased.

No, your "point" isn't short because you "cut all the scrap." Your point is short because you didn't have one to begin with. In this thread you've not posted ONE SINGLE FACT that backed your assertion, despite given REPEATED chances to do so. You've lied REPEATEDLY when you couldn't conjure up any meaningful arguments to back your point.

Your Lee Hyun-Il was in his prime post 2008 or Park Sung-Hwan gave Lin Dan troubles claims are pure fantasy. Both have beaten Lin Dan EXACTLY ONCE since 2007. You can say it 100 more times and you'd still be a clown. Could there be players who have playing styles that gave Lin Dan troubles? Conceivably. But guess what, Park Sung-Hwan ain't it.

I'm declaration of loss/win isn't childish at all. It's a statement of fact, buttressed by the fact that you haven't actually brought an argument. That's clear cut victory in anybody's book.