Then the result would be like PG is rank 7, even if he has better H2H againts BCL the rank no 4, how do you justify that?? If BCL won more games againts other players, then what?? it has nothing to do with PG, PG was not even there.
From what I saw from Japan Open, what LCW gave against BCL is better than what I have ever saw from CJ.
haha, can you read the English alphabets instead of the flags. What I said was: ZN/ZYL ranked 36th, TJM/TQ ranked 70th, please check this page: http://www.tournamentsoftware.com/ranking/category.aspx?id=1684&category=476&p=2 But you argued it's the 5th. On the page you gave there was a China flag with the 5th position, but the players are TJM/ZYW, but what I said ZN/ZYL and the 24th in your link was ZB/MJ, but I listed was TJM/MJ. The fact is now it's ZN/ZYL and TJM/MJ playing the Japan open, not TJM/ZYW and ZB/MJ. I don't know where your mistakes came from? Just read the little red flag, without reading the players' names, or you were just on purpose ?!
that's the simple answer I can provide Even though PG had better H2H against BCL, but PG had worse H2H against Chen Jin, Taufik, Song, and Chen Long, while BCL had better H2H (wining) against Chen Jin, Taufik, Song, and Chen Long. You guys draw conclusion really like kids, even drew conclusion that CHJ was the best H2H because he beat LD in the far east games; then to disapprove something you don't undersand.
We already went through this, what does BCL records againts other players has anything to do with PG?? As far i know PG is better player (H2H) than BCL. I did not see anyone come to that conclusion, its was merely a mock on those who suggest using H2H alone to find out who's the world best player. If you dont understand the content then perhaps you should go back to school amongs the kids
the score line: Nova WIDIANTO [1] [INA] Liliyana NATSIR [INA] - [CHN] Nan ZHANG [CHN] Yunlei ZHAO 11-21 11-21 0:21 [INA] WIDIANTO / NATSIR --vs--- ZHANG / ZHAO[CHN] 12 Smash winner 20 2 Net winner 5 4 Clear winner 8 4 Other 9 4 Most consecutive points 7 0 Game points 3 64 Rallies played 64 22 Rallies won 42 The world ranked #1 lost to world ranked #36 in all categories! then the world ranked #70 totally humiliated the world ranked #2nd: TAO / TIAN [CHN] - [INA] GUNAWAN [2] / MARISSA 21-10 21-9 0:22 17 Smash winner 4 9 Net winner 7 0 Clear winner 0 16 Other 8 5 Most consecutive points 2 2 Game points 0 61 Rallies played 61 42 Rallies won 19 What a game! No competition at all! especially gunawan/marissa, who never won anything worth to mention, How come they are the #2 in the ranking? It's absolutely a joke to claim they are the 2nd best mixed pair in the world
My suggestion is to develope a new ranking system by professionals. If the mathematical model is good enough, H2H records have already been taken into consideration in the ranking system. There is no conflics between H2H and ranking. There is a huge difference between good ranking system and BWF ranking system.
is this the ranking of yours you are talking about? are your referring to bwf's model here? unless you share with us whats this good ranking system of yours i think we can't say its better. even though bwf's ranking is not perfect as you earlier pointed out cheers
just to say it again. yes, we need world ranking, it is necessary adminstratively... we need a system in order to run the competitions as fair as possible, but just as fair as possible. however this is based on some point-system that is man-made to transfer a certain result into points which is the direct base for the ranking, and therefore not directly and perfertly reflecting player's competitiveness... so if you are talking about the player's direct comparison on abilities, H2H record is a factual reflection... facts don't lie, facts don't biase or distort the comparison as much as a point system. we are not denying LCW is the current WR#1... but if you are talking about who's the most winning player amongst all of the top players, or if you ask who's the technically (badminton-wise, not WR-point-wise) better player, you know where to find your gut feeling... on-court facts. if I ask you who's the better general you like to send to win a war? you would not just look at his certificates or ranking that a 5-star is automatically better than a 4-star one... you would look at his CV, look at his battlefield record, look at the directly relevant hard facts..
Is the BWF ranking system designed by amateurs in the first place? Are you implying the professionals are governed by those jack of all trades from BWF? Many a times we forgot actually who we are and where we stood and we tend to over estimate ourselves.
Here it comes again. Inconsistency and contradictions from one post to another. Like I said some do not know where their stand is or which side of the line they choose to be at.
..imo, LCW was able to battle through 3 games. If it was really2 bothering him, then i would imagine he would've lost in straight games or call it a WO. ..why not??..what's the reasoning of you to think it's a laughing stock to use a legit BWF record database solely to determine it?..if you don't think we can determine that LD is the "best" player solely by the H2H ranking, then i ask, with what process would you suggest?.. ..yes, the list posted by freelast in post #6 is correct; at least that's what he's after. Nothing bias or anything, simply facts. The thread starter doesn't want us to justify a player's H2H record vs. just another player (PG vs. BCL). Instead we have to take into account the records vs. all the top players (i guess, the top 10). Even if PG has a 10-0 H2H record vs. LD but he has losing records or tie records vs. the other players, then his ranking would be lower. Isn't that what the intention of this thread is about??.. Again, folks, let's not make this into something complicated. If it is, just go back and re-read the thread's title and do the comparison of all the players. If LD is clear no.1, then who is no.2? Im sure you'll come up with something freelast already posted. It's very simple and straightforward! *Btw, please learn to re-read slowly the thread's title or the post's content before you quickly reply; otherwise, you'll get a reply like in post #203..
From the very beginning this thread ain't going no where. It would definitely stream rolled into arguments and more arguments ("discussion" the so called educated ones called). Let say we come to conclusion that some of you would bend backwards (you know who you are) in order to put LD as the top dog over LCW in this thread (come-on CJ, PG and the rest merely are just decoys) and you succeeded, so what we should do then? LD is the best player ever in.......? officially or unofficially? By whom? How? When? It leaves us blank. So the title of the thread is confusing to start with. It should go WHO IS THE PEOPLE'S CHAMPION out there so it can save us from all these debates and maintain the status-quo of each individual player they well deserved. Also with that title, it could eventually ease the curiosity of many as to whom the self acclaimed neutralist actually admired. Or there is a hidden agenda after all.
WOW!!!!!!! By implication, the BWF ranking system has been developed by amateurs and sideshow specialists. Their criteria for ranking are obviously outmoded and inconsequential to your grand design!! This thread has been designed from the start to promote an agenda whose very premise is at odds with the facts. Not a good feeling at all!
Are BCers not participating in our PAW Games because they dislike BWF Ranking? . One thing I noticed in this debate is that most of our BCers who are participating in our BadmintonCentral PAW Games do not disapprove the BWF Ranking System. Our BC PAW Game uses the BWF Ranking System (right into every detail) to rank our PAWers' ranking, and no PAWers have ever complained. It just dawned on me to ask this question: "Are BCers not participating in our PAW Games because they think our BWF Ranking System is not good?" .
but chris, i don't have objections to bwf ranking or should i whisper to you who the hell am i to judge bwf's ranking and i don't play paw either! i don't like paw because i don't like to play play games i like the real thing
