I just voted for the Old scoring system but would still consider playing variations of the Rally scoring system in various situation. I'd prefer the newer system if it was 25x3 or 30x3 rather thanthe current 21x3. There are +'s and -'s to rally scoring for badminton but some of this would be minimized if we adopted a longer (25 or 30 pt) forma. Only if I had a time constraint would I consider playing 21x3 rally scoring. The drama & the dynamics have changed a bit with scoring changes in both table tennis and v'ball but they both remain enjoyable from both a playing & a spectating prespective. I believe the same would be true of badminton.
Yeah the NSS has grown on me. There seems to be a lot more tension throughout the match, whereas the old system in comparison now seems a little drawn out. I'd play either, but right now I slightly favour the new system .
Combining OSS & NSS: rally point until game point An idea occurred to me that may improve NSS: keep rally point so that score will move along, but switch to 'serving point' when one side has reached game point. So there could be exchange of service w/o point moving only at game point; before game point each rally still awards a point to winning side. Whoever reaches 21 point first wins the game. This way there is reasonable chance of reversal at game point, the leading side can't relax & wait for opponent's error to win a game; the down side is total # of rallies is still not limited. I imagine this will make the game more intense throughout. Does this sound interesting to you guys?
Interesting idea, mettayogi. However, it may be better suited for singles than for doubs due to the added complexity. As it is, many are having a difficult time keeping the serving order and score count correct with rally scoring when it comes to doubs. The high school leagues in this area have not adopted rally scoring becuz of this complexity. I recall that the high school readily adopted the 7-point game (experiment) a few years ago but still have not yet done so with rally scoring.
Personally, I think NSS is great, if you are the one manage a tournament. The organizer can now getting more ppl to participate, packed in more games/events, in order to generate more profit and promote the sport/club, etc. However, as a player from an area that badminton is not too popular, I see NSS doing more damage than the OSS, especially with the great gap in between skills among players. Basically, the skillful players can trash the less skilled ones in a shorter period of time, which means less playing time for many below average club members. Also, the home court advantage is significant in tournament plays. The away players take a big blow (i.e. more costly errors) due to the new environment (lighting, floor, lines, etc), and never get a chance to really start a fight before losing. Overall, I think NSS is good for a group of ppl who share the similar skill, and willing to play in various of games. However, NSS is a total nightmare for open public clubs (with great difference in skill gap), which have a rather tight court time for everyone.
Vancouver Here in Vancouver everyone is using the NSS, especially the old folks. They think the 21 rally points system give them an advantage . In actuality, the opposite happens.
I prefer the NSS also because it makes each point more exciting. Also, my friend and I usually win service returns with 1 or 2 shots so the NSS works to our advantage.
Well, they (the old folks) think it's advantageous for them and it's kinda true... ...they lose faster and can play more games.
actually shortening the game ALWAYS is advantageous for the weaker player... Just use Rally scoring to 1... andy you´ll see the old-timers will get an odd game now and then /Twobeer
Why? I keep hearing this, but I don't understand it. Would someone please explain to me why it is that one would focus more on a serve in a system (NSS) that reduces one's dependency on it, rather than in a system (OSS) where you can't win a point without being able to get the serve in? In my case, in singles, it makes no difference. In doubles, because there is the additional pressure of not letting down your partner, when playing rally scoring, I don't take any risks and go with boring, but safe, short serves. But that's just cutting down on risk, and has nothing to do with focus.
Strange, after one year and looking back my view on OSS and NSS is still evenly divided. From a spectator point of view, I prefer NSS as it makes any competitive match much more excited to watch. The advantage swings quickly from one player to another and you cannot really be sure who would win. From a player point of view, I prefer OSS as it gives me and my partner a fair amount of playing time on court when we are sharing playing time among a group of players. At the level we play where mistakes are a plenty, NSS is just too short for us to enjoy thoroughly before the game is over and we have to wait for our next turn. I still hold on to my vote.
I can't believe I just did this, but I voted for the New Scoring System. If I had been asked this question a year ago, I would have said "no way". But it's grown on me - maybe because I'm getting older and slower, I no longer mind the shorter games! Still, If I had things my way, I would choose NSS for singles and OSS for doubles. Wayne Young
Mohan Subramaniam on "Change" published in BWF's website Here's what New Zealand's new Coaching & High Performance Director, Mohan Subramaniam's views are on change in general and the new scoring system in particular: Concerning changes in the world of badminton, Mohan said, “Change is inevitable. People will always want change but usually very apprehensive until they see positive outcome. With change, there will always be small temporary set backs. For instance, when the idea of the Rally Point Scoring System was mooted, many people were quietly apprehensive. Some people thought it was going to make badminton negative. But now players, officials and the media are happy with it. The spectators love the tension. Then we have the World Training Center in Saarbrucken, Germany managed by Gunther Huber which is coming along fine. The concept of BWF Coaches and also Coach Development initiatives seem very refreshing. Besides, changes in the tournament structure could also excite newly retired players to come out. The Super Series will start this week in Malaysia. The prize money, competition format and television coverage is exciting. Whatever it is, badminton is moving forward. Remaining steady without any change does not mean progress. Just like the pace of the game itself, the presentation and management of the game have to change.” Mohan believes that BWF is making great strides in development although the gap between the developed and the other nations is big.
Completely agree... I know we all love the OSS, but the NSS is here now, hope we can all open our minds and accept the evolutions in the sport.
Evolution is not always good. I'm still confident the powers that be might revert back to a form of the OSS. I like the OSS the way it was but one modification, make the serve more of a weapon: instead of the current doubles service lines, allow it to extend to the singles service line length while maining the doubles service line width.
