popularity Has the popularity of badminton improved since the implementation of the New Scoring System?
and how do you know that I'm not familiar, or haven't tried the NSS. And what's so hard to follow with the NSS. Careful, your slip is showing... LOL!!!
Very nicely put... and the gist of my preference for the OSS, plus the fact the NSS has few real advantages over the OSS, WHEN viewed from the point of playing the game alone. (not covered is TV air time, chance for weaker players not be be shut out in scoring, taking stamina out of the equation, or at least making it less important..)
I hate the new rules. LEt's be honest here, The new rules make The rush o the game boring. There is almost zip to none chance for a comeback and the rush of whther or not this could be your last rally is gone. I prefer the old system.
Yes, NSS has taken away the stamina factor Hi Turbo, Yes, the NSS has taken away the stamina factor, especially in the Singles Matches. When I was 36, and still with passion in competing in tournaments, I entered in some Singles Tournaments. But, under the OSS, when I was matched up with some 18 year old players, I found that they would wear me out by long, long rallies, applying the stamina factor. I think with the NSS, we should see players like Zhang Ning, Peter Gade, etc... to continue to compete into their later years. Why should anyone retire from Badminton because of their older age ??? It is good that sports like bowling, boxing, golf, tennis, etc...... that participants can stiill enjoy at top levels when they get older. We hope that with the NSS, more skillful International Players would not retire too early. Cheers... chris@ccc
I personally favor the new system. Adapted and liked it only after a few matches. It's a lot more fast paced.
Roughly, NSS 21-10 = OSS 15-0 ??? Hi ouijaouija, Yes, when you play a tougher player who can win 2 rallies whenever you win 1, then; under the NSS, he would beat you by 21-10, but under the OSS, he could beat you by 15-0. That is why many players say that the OSS does not really show the true skill difference between the players, but the NSS does. For example, if a tougher player who can win more than 21 rallies whenever you win 1, then; under the NSS, he would now beat you by 21-0, but under the OSS, he would still beat you by 15-0. So, under the OSS, when you get a result that so-and-so won by 15-0, you can't really tell whether that winner is 100 times better or that he/she is only twice better. Cheers... chris@ccc
I play almost exclusively 21 games now (due to the stupid rules ).. And the main problem I think is that it introduces much more element of chance and luck.. even a realtive newbie can score a point even against top pros. with this system.. just by one lucky shot hitting the net-cord.. Looking at Copenhagen masters for example many games where 21-19 or similar.. For fun I counted the number of net-cord and in-doubt linecalls in just one of these games during the masters, and it was something like 8 points decided by the net-cord or a "controversial" line-decision... So its easy to see that whoever is on the winning end of those "lucky" shots have become far more important these days when players are evenly matched.. I think the OSS did a much better job at separating to close players to actually get the best one to win the match.. Especially in doubles..to much chance has been introduce imop.. /Twobeer P.S. BTW I do not consider a tight net-tumble or service return hitting the net-cord to be pure "luck" as most pros training for perfection will get quite good percentage making those.. Drops, smashes hitting the cord could on the other hand really go either way (and also dubious line-calls) D.S.
Time for Action? OK, I'm new to this message board but have been playing badminton for many years. I haven't had the time to trawl through all of the opinions listed but have viewed a sample and, most importantly have noted the 80:20 vote in favour of the old system. I have played both systems and very much prefer the old system mainly because of the tension it generates in matches as one pair (yes I only play doubles these days) tries to gradually get the upper hand in a close fought game. That 15th point is often very difficult to win, especially if the opposition are in double figures. It annoys me when close games in the NSS are 'all of a sudden over' without that thrill or despair of winning or losing the final point. Why should the many thousands of club and local league players in the UK, and around the world, be forced to change the way they play their favourite sport just to satisfy the whim of TV companies in particular areas of the world? I accept that the voting may be moderated by more people getting used to the new system. However, if the vast majority of people are still in favour of the OSS then what are we doing about it? I have not seen any recent debate by Badminton England. If they do not listen to their members then I would imagine many of them will attempt to de-affiliate and therby weaken the official base of the sport - exactly the opposite of what they wanted. Apologies if this is covered in other threads. A brief search did not suggest so.
Well said. Agree completely. With the new system, as soon as you run up a big early lead, the game is essentially over. The Last Point _should_ be difficult to get. This does puzzle me. Even people who never intend to play in tournaments, who keep telling me that they prefer the old system, who profess to dislike the new system, they keep playing it, simply because of some odd feeling of obligation. I don't get it. I have de-affiliated from USAB. I have stopped playing or volunteering in tournaments that use the new system. A year ago, I was deep in planning to go watch the 2008 Olympics, but have now dropped the whole idea. Whenever I play, I ask that people play the old system (I call it the "classical" system!) with me, regardless of what else they may play with anybody else. I am not in the majority here in New England, at least among the more regular players. But the support for the new system is soft. Like I said, there is some kind of weird feeling of obligation to hew to the line. Must be an Asian Thang. If the system is changed back, people will breathe a sigh of relief.
I think we should start a second poll about the same question... Perhaps many users voted too fast, even without playing the NSS at least 1 time... I think the result would not be 80:20 anymore, I think it would be 60:40 or 70:30. (I also voted/and would vote again for the OSS) I like the rallypoint system (every point counts), that's not the problem, also I prefered to only be able to score point with your own serve... The problem of NSS is, that the games have to be shorter. 21 is too long and you have no chance to recover from 12:19 or something like that. That's really boring. 5x11 would be much better then 3x21, perhaps 7x9 would be even better. I like the scoring systems in DARTS and TENNIS In darts, there are points, legs, sets, match in tennis there are points, games, sets, match In badminton there are only points, games, match So there are much more decisions in darts and tennis and a much bigger chance to recover after a bad start, that's much more thrilling... In tennis you can lead 5:0, but it's very difficult to win the 6th game, because you need again 4 points the win the 6th game (and win the set). I badminton (espacially in doubles) it was nearly the same under the OSS, but now this is not possible anymore. So finally I think badminton should use the same scoring system like tennis.
To me the old scoring system and the new scoring system have both pros and cons old-less rallies because it's up to 15 points -less tiring because only 15 points -bad part is if you have 10 points and your opponent has 13 you have less time to beat him/her new-you can make a bigger difference in scores -more tiring due to the up to 21 points so it's basically personal preferences
@azn_123: You're wrong, there where more rallies in OSS and the OSS was also more tiring, the NSS was also made to shorten the matches... With the OSS you can have 10 rallies and it's still 0-0. Did you ever play a match in NSS?!?
I absolutely agree w/ xt6666. I've tried it a few times, and I was like, "What, the game's over?!" Also, when we were practicing at school, we used the NSS, but we didn't play to 21, but the winner was the one with more points after 7 minutes. With OSS, scores were something like 7-5, but with NSS, my partner and I got something up to 40-30. WHA?!!! I support the OSS, although the new one is indeed more fair with the serving.
Have been playing the NSS in both singles and doubles match for 6 months now. My opinion? I dislike the NSS, and clearly prefer the classic OSS. I like battling it out until I get really exhausted. Much more rewarding feeling.
