A loose form of grading/ranking system would help exactly in forums like this where we can opt to join groups within our grade/rank. Otherwise it's probably too boring for the better players if joining a group of noobs. And for noobs like me it's gonna be a massacre if we joined a bunch of pros.
The table's good. But I think the gap between Intermediate and Expert is a bit too large. Probably can fit a few levels like High Intermediate or Advanced in between.
Player Rankings Ratings of players depends on where you are living. In the U.S. I would say that most players consider badminton the game you play on the lawn while waiting for the food to barbeque. The places I play at are open to anyone wanting to play regardless of previous experience. Most do not care about court position, tactics, deception, or scoring. Just having a rally with 8 or 10 hits is as exciting and as much fun as the game with advanced players. So ranking of players according to their ability is only important for those who want to participate in a tournement and has no bearing on the level of enjoyment you get from the game.
Grading players for friendly competition purposes only . K4mu1 ... In Australia, we grade players for friendly competition purposes only. It is really for certain groups of players of similar standards do play together in our competitions. Many moons ago, I was the Official Grader for the Sydney Badminton Association. I have to play against and/or to watch the ability of each player. And then I grade them. And tell you what, it's not that easy. Many factors are involved (like what you have said): Skill Technique Experience Knowledge Tactics Age Fitness Composure Mental Stamina Speed Power Footwork Accuracy etc... And let's say there are 4 grades: A, B, C and D. Within each grade, there can be a big range of skills. For example, the top B-grade players are similar to the bottom A-grade players, and the bottom B-grade players are similar to the top C-grade players. So how do you decide? Actually, when I was in Sydney, there was even a grade called the 'A Reserve', which sits between A and B. Anyway, we decided that if a player/pair wins a tournament in their grades, they would automatically be promoted to the next higher grade. And we have this rule: Players are only allowed to participate in competitions in their grades or higher, but not lower. So, you can see... it's all for social/friendly reasons. In true competition conditions, there should be no grading. Anyone should be able to participate to play against others. And this is found in Asian countries. Now you know how we do it in Australia. .
It's the participation and the enjoyment of Badminton that we wish to promote . jk1980 ... That's exactly what I wish to indicate. In my club, we insist that our members to be not arrogant but friendly. We insist that our members, especially the more experienced ones, to help beginners to enjoy Badminton. It's the participation and the enjoyment of Badminton that we wish to promote. .
something that we can reference is the tennis rating system: full: http://dps.usta.com/usta_master/sitecore_usta/USTA/Document Assets/2006/04/03/doc_13_12277.pdf poster version: http://dps.usta.com/usta_master/sitecore_usta/USTA/Document Assets/2006/04/03/doc_13_12278.pdf i read it and it is quite interesting. food for thoughts.
That's what I'm talking about xD... There can be no chance that grading is so easy... Your explanation is actually more acceptable than mine. Actually, I'm referring to Yonex Badminton Racket Chart. there are 3 category there, Beginner, Intermediate, Advanced. Maybe we could talk about what's in Yonex mind down here? (Are those level just like me and some others said previously?) If it comes to Professional, using grades like yours is certain. There always be Black Horse with low rank because s|he's rarely participating in a tourney. Yet s|he won. That's because most badminton tournaments nowadays is using those ranking...
I have a way of telling whether someone is getting better and it involves testing the players backhand because everyone is weaker to a degree on their backhand; For a beginner, if you hit a clear deep to their backhand they'll just stand there or swing and miss. For the same backhand shot intermediate players will reach the shuttle, play a shot and return it but they won't be able to return it deep, maybe half court. If you play all your strokes to an intermediate players forehand net followed by an offensive clear to their backhand rearcourt they won't do very well. Against advanced players, well they can clear deep off their backhand all the way to the baseline with little effort so to beat them you need all the shots in the book. In my opinion if you don't have the ablilty to return a backhand from baseline to baseline you can't be an advanced player. Intermediate players can have very good forehand shots but on the backhand they'll fall short. That chart on the previous page showed this with the backhand clear/smash being the hardest shot in the book. Tim H
I don't know, some people have a naturally good backhand, whereas even some advanced players would struggle to clear backhand the full length of he court. I can do it, but depending on the situation, I may decide to play another shot. I don't really like playing backhand clears so I avoid it where possible (unless of course, it's the best shot to play). I just don't think you can grade somebody on how well they play one shot.
I've seen some recreational players with pretty decent backhand. But they can still be lacking in other areas. In fact sometimes i feel that their backhand makes them lazier. They still can be and will be easily beaten by players who might be...fitter/smarter/having better footwork,but have almost no backhand clear in their game. In fact i've seen so many players with their backhand become their lazy-hand(even advanced players), and it becomes a bad habit. I think overhead can compensate for backhand clear. Just imagine playing a game with XXF. How many of us here can actually FORCE a backhand out of her? Anyway i don't deny that backhand clear can help gauge a player's level but backhand clear ALONE definitely can't be used for classify them into grading bands
My point exactly. You can easily make up for a lack of a backhand clear if you want to and a round the head shot would probably be more powerful and accurate. This is the reason I play it where possible and the backhand clear when I have to. I have to agree with you about the gauging level on the basis of one shot. Somebody could have a really rubbish smash but the rest of their game could be awesome. If you were grading them on their smash, they'd be weak, but their overall game would be very strong.
Maybe I should change my level of play in my profile to low intermediate now based on the various grading systems you guys posted.
I think a grading system based on something like this would be most appropriate. Perhaps not just a Y/N. But perhaps each of these (techniques) should be assigned a value. So your grade will depend on how many of these techniques you're able to master. This way, someone may actually suck at a few of these but excel in the rest to compensate, so may still be considered advanced or high-intermediate. Any countries/clubs doing something like this? I think Malaysia don't have any such grading system (correct me if i'm wrong)
jk1980, I almost qualify as an expert (although I still think I'm far from being one ... too far). The only thing I couldn't do is a powerful backhand smash.
One effective way to group badminton players is whether it is their physical, technical, tactical or mental skills that are holding them back. For physical skills, this would be someone extremely unathletic who would have difficulty hitting basic strokes without physical issues. This person would be classified as a pre-beginner, and would be best off taking a few exercise classes before moving ahead to something more challenging like badminton. When technical skills are the limiting issue, the player would be beginner to intermediate. The key here is consistency. Can the player consistently play good shots without unforced errors? In singles, just keeping shots in against these players would be a good strategy, as mistakes will be made by them fairly frequently. You could separate this into two sub stages: beginner for the basic techniques (clear, drop, smash) and intermediate for the more advanced strokes (1/2 smash, slice, spin). At the next level, the player is not likely to give you easy points by making mistakes unless you pressure them using good tactical play. This requires having a few "weapons" (e.g. good smash, deception, tactical awareness, etc) on top of a solid technical foundation. This group would be categorized as advanced. At the highest level, it isn't court skills that are holding a player back, but rather it would be mental skills. These players have access to the best coaches, so what matters most not what skills they've learned by rather their ability to deliver in big competitions. You might categorize this group as elite.
Not a bad idea, however, it comes down to the level of shots again. I could have a really terrible backhand (I don't, but my backhand isn't great either) but a really awesome forehand (again, I don't but my forehand is rather good ). You might never be able to make me play a backhand but I'd get marked down for not having a strong backhand. I think you need to look at a player's overall game, not just their ability to play shots.
