That depends completely on your modeling of competition. I say more than the Top 4 count, so it is more competitive. You seem to value consistent top players over everything, so a discipline with 4 really strong consistent players that doesn't even fill a 32 draw could be the most competitive by your definition. I have the opinion that the most competitive discipline is the one where it is hardest to get to the top and/or win titles, and that is definitely MS. That women retire earlier has a slew of other reasons, some of which I described, some of which I'm certainly not even aware of, but it is definitely not because they somehow have to play harder than the men, or because it's so easy to stay in the MS scene. Because of the higher speeds and jumps, MS is definitely more stressful on certain weak points like the knees or ankles, and I'm unaware of significant differences in joint strength between genders.... One could also make the connection that the increased competition of a discipline meant more early exits and thus less stress->more longevity, but I think that's quite convoluted. The simple truth is that MS has the most tournament entries out of any discipline, and that results in more pressure, more competition as there's always a long stream of contenders waiting to take any available spot. One also has to make a distinction between having a strong elite in a discipline and it being overall competitive, because those aren't the same to me. MS had a way stronger elite in the years 2006-2012, with a strong Top4-5 winning almost all available titles, but I'd say it's actually more competitive now, despite the top players not being quite as strong as back then (as evidenced by LD and LCW still posing a credible threat to them despite them being well past their prime).
Oh relax, he never said those titles were easy, or that Srikanth got them gifted to him. He simply said there are certainly harder paths to titles, which is 100% true and in no way a criticism of the player. Also you apply faulty logic, Prannoy beating LCW and/or CL with an overperformance didn't make him a stronger player, Srikanth would've found both of them harder opponents for sure - again, no one said it was easy, just that it could've been harder. I disagree with the point he made, but get off your nationalistic high horse and stop misinterpreting what he wrote, pls.
As always, you jump again in the middle to stir it further. I don't even want to talk to you. Let him explain about his post . Either he don't know anything about the draw or he simply forget that the player in the final need not play all the seeds in the tournament. 8 seeds will be separated in 8 quadrants respectively. He or she will meet each other starting from quarterfinals . He has failed in every way about the 'easy' draw thing. First let him explain to me . I will reply him. Sent from my SM-G600FY using Tapatalk
Yeah, i have to say MS is the most competitive sector. Like Jackie said, its harder to get to the top. I believe WD and XD is least competitive sector because you can start as nobody and enter the rounds and rise up pretty quickly. Also because not many Europeans play Doubles .In fact, they are fast becoming irrelevant sector. While WS and MD are equal i guess, anybody can upset anybody. For that matter, its highly competitive too.
You are saying it wrong, MD is equal if minions is not playing, if minions is playing they have 70 percent chance of winning the tournament
I wonder you like to include WC and Japan open this year to support your line of argument? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Of course, especially the WC. The women's field was seeds 1 through 8, minus #4 seed RI, who was beaten by SN, who can also beat almost anyone on her day. That's nearly the perfect scenario. Japan Open was relatively strong in the later stages for the men, but I still think the women's field in the quarter final was stronger, given that CXX and GFJ beat TTY and PVS respectively.
I totally give it you. WS field has been the most competitive in all these years of my badminton memory starting from 2012. It has always been a near to impossible task for anyone outside Top 8 to win a major/SS WS title. So my question here is how did you pick 2017 as the weaker field for MS? In all these years, MS has been kind to the unseeded players, in letting them win a title or two. If you ask me the least competitive year in recent times for MS, I would pick 2016. There were a lot of new champions, starting from the second quarter to the end of the year. Reasons being Olympics year, suspension of KM, players’ injuries and players skipping tournaments before and after Olympics. 2017 had much better competition than 2016. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Actually the scenario you're describing perfectly underlines what I'm saying - even unseeded players pose a real danger and can win matches or even titles in MS, whereas WS is limited to a select few who can win anything, whilst a large part of the players isn't competitive.
Probably a matter of definition. My point is that the unseeded (this is btw just a term to make the arguing easier, an unseeded Ginting is a tougher opponent than a seeded CL) can beat the top players, because the top players aren't really all that good. This is - like most things in sports - a circular or wave motion in terms of quality. A couple of years ago, the German Bundesliga (football) was extremely successful in European competition, the national team was world champion and publications like the Guardian churned out article after article on how to emulate the "German system" in order to make English football better. The league was on a "high". Nowadays, there's hardly anything left of that momentum. The German clubs are a laughing stock in Europe, the best club is nowhere near what it was in terms of dominance and quality as in the Guardiola era and the national team...well, I don't have to tell you. It's the same number of players in the league, but they are rather shite these days. I feel it's the same in badminton: While the big three in MS have been regressing for various reasons, no one was there to really fill the void and only now that generational transition seems to get going. In WS it's the opposite: all of the top players are in their early or mid twenties, there's ample young talent to pressure the top (first AY, then the two Chinese, now another generation with GMT, GJW, CYY, GFJ and more to come). And those top players are TTY, who might not have the titles "required" for goat, but certainly the badminton, physically unparalled specimen like CM and PVS, maniacs like AY and NO and all time great talents like RI or SN. They are, of course, also ensuring a steady development of getting better by constantly having battles against each other like the PVS-NO saga. How much better has CL gotten over the past years? SWH? LD? KS? JOJ? Axelsen (a bit unfair now, I know)? Overall, I think WS is on top of the curve right now, while MS is slowly recovering from it's lowest point. And that's why I think WS is much more competitive than MS at the moment.
Agreed, Fuku/Hiro's games are too safe and steady, they mostly reply on their good control on clears to the backline between players and sometime do sudden drops or smash, similar to their coach Suetsuna's style I guess.
My definition of whether an entire discipline is competitive doesn't hinge on how strong the elite is, though. The drop-off is rather steep in WS, much less so in MS. Outside of the Top10, no one can expect to win serious titles, and outside of China, barely any ntl team players have to fight to defend their spots. That's not a competitive discipline to me. Seems we agree on the elite being stronger/more separated in WS though, but that'll stop soon enough just like it did in MS - at least for a while
It’s sad to see how SWH’s career is heading to a decline. An year go, he played nonstop badminton and consistently made it to QF and SF of all those tournaments, but couldn’t win that elusive title in that time period. Now, coming back from an injury, he couldn’t keep with the current elite and the age also is not his side. I’m afraid CTC would also head down the same path, if he doesn’t make a conscious decision to put Quality over quantity, sometime soon. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
