I have some new doubts now:-
What do you mean by pivot?
Well often one has their racket foot a bit forward in a ready position.. some may have their racket foot a bit back when defending.. but the racket foot isn't way back.
When returning serve, the racket foot is way back. You are said to be already turned , turned 'to the side'. You are more ready to go back.
The movement to move from a ready position, where the racket foot isn't way back, to that sideways on racket foot back position, is called a pivot.
When returning serve you don't need to pivot because you are already turned.
But if you'd lifted it then you're ready they may clear it they may drop it they may smash it.. And if they clear it then you'd pivot prior to any further movement back.
How far the foot goes back and how much to the side you should be, down to where it's ok for your front foot to point, is something you may or may not, encounter slight differences on
Udbhav said:
What is the difference between a chasse and shuffle?
What I can say for sure is a chasse is when the feet don't cross. The problem is that is rather general. Some may add that it's a bit like one foot chasing the other one. What you did in your video is a chasse.
As for what a shuffle is
I pointed you in this thread to a video by jimmy lin, titled "Badminton Footwork by Jimmy Lin, Part 1G: Block Jump". That video is 51 seconds long. As mentioned, his first 17 seconds is always his confusing intro that I warned about and suggested skipping. So that lesves 34 seconds of video to watch there. And he uses the word "shuffle" there while doing them prior to his jump. It's pretty clear what a shuffle is from that. It's a lot easier than a chasse. And you can do a chasse..
It may be that shuffle is a subset of chasse.. so maybe chasse is a bit general. But shuffle is clear at least there.
Udbhav said:
Does feet crossing mean this:-
At 24 secs in the video her feet cross each other while she moves to forehand back court.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/T5xjde2H4vb9yJxW7
Also in above video is the player doing chasse or shuffle steps to move towards forehand back court corner?
Please provide some videos they would be really helpful.
Re what is happening in that video, others can answer much better than me. . Also, I don't tend to play singles much, and singles really has all the footwork.
But, when feet cross it's definitely not a chasse. That is for sure. Chasse is like one foot 'chases' the other but they don't cross.
If on youtube you were to look up chasse in the context of ballet you'd also see chasses with some explanations.
https://www(dot)youtube.com(slash)watch?v=kk8K1DYeXIU and maybe fencing too uses some form of chasse.
But you are doing it very well
I only know chasses from badminton, and the way I learnt it it's better for feet not to touch and like you are doing it, feet not touching. You can chasse.
You could also practise doing them from the T, to the net so as to do a delicate net shot.
One thing that is definitely feet crossing and would be categorised as cross-over footwork is in the picture here.
https://www.badmintonbible.com/footwork/net/cross-over
That guy used to contribute here, as Gollum, and is considered to have some good stuff.
Beyond that, as far as feet crossing is concerned, I'm not necessarily much clearer than you on what people are talking about when they use some of these terms..
Look at AG Rogers post.. in this thread, Steps and Crossovers July 2008
https://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/index.php?threads/steps-and-crossovers.58141/
His entire post.
But also, he says
"
Running step is pretty obvious, in that it's how we normally move (i.e. going straight forwards or backwards). While efficient in its use of energy it doesn't really allow you to get sideways on without further corrective steps at the point of contact hence losing a lot of its efficiency.
Crossover step is the next type (which can be further broken down into crossover in front of standing leg and crossover behind standing leg). Again this tends to be in a lateral direction, thus forcing you to get sideways on making body rotation far easier and more natural at point of contact.
"
AGRogers is pretty clear in so far as that he doesn't generalise one of those two terms, or equate them. And in how he defines running steps.
There are better people than me to ask about crossover steps.. I might not even use them when I play doubles, and I don't play singles.
I'd add that running steps in badminton, I think you are meant to still turn the hips. .
There are some that generalise and refer to forward and backwards running steps as cross over steps, because the feet are crossing over. But maintain that running is just for forward and backward. So for example, see Gollum's post in that thread.
So for example when there was a reference to "3 step cross-over" in mason's thread, they were referring to 3 running steps back
what is in this video in post #1 from 1:48-1:50 you get a shuffle and three running steps back
https://www.badmintoncentral.com/fo...pe-of-footwork-involving-running-back.183442/
i've seen a simpler shuffle, and I notice his running steps are a bit hips facing the net.. but that aside. there are a couple of running steps there that some may call cross-over steps, because they generalise the term.
Looking at the "Steps and Crossovers" thread, July 2008, (mentioned and linked to earlier in this post) Blundey makes a good point here, he says "chasses can be utilized more than going side to side, they can be used in any manner of direction."
And I agree with Blundey when he completely distinguishes running steps and cross-over steps,and like AGRogers, he doesn't generalise or equate them. I think it's much clearer that way too.
But sometimes, whoever is using the term, you have to see what they mean..