NEW: Fixed Height Experiment for Service

Discussion in 'Rules / Tournament Regulation / Officiating' started by CantSmashThis, Jan 10, 2013.

Joined:
Apr 30, 2011
Messages:
576
241
Location:
Norway
I think it's quite funny that some people think that less tall players will be faulted less. It all has to do with the personality - giving the oportunity, any player that used to challenge the rules by serving too high will also push the bundaries with the new rules and we will see fault serves from both tall and low players equally... I have seen some low players try serving amost above their head, don't tell me you think it's impossible...

2. SSSSNT Regular Member

Joined:
Oct 9, 2011
Messages:
569
94
Location:
Here
If they practice there is no advantage.

3. s_mair Regular Member

Joined:
Oct 10, 2013
Messages:
4,042
2,247
Location:
Germany
No matter how often you repeat this sentence, it still stays wrong. There are simple physical facts in the game that cannot be equalized with just enough practise.

Example: Guy 1 (let's call him Biggie), 1.95 m vs. Guy 2 (Shorty that is), 1.70 m

Legal service height today (rough estimate):
Biggie: 1.20 ~ 1.25 m
Shorty: 1.05 ~ 1.10 m

Legal service height according new rule:
Biggie: 1.15 m
Shorty: 1.15 m

Biggie MUST lower his serve by a couple of cm whilst Shorty can legally raise his. Biggie's former advantage (higher contact point = flatter shuttle trajectory) is gone. He can practise as much as he wants, he will not be allowed to get it back to its previous height. And I don't think we need to discuss that a higher contact point and hence a flatter trajectory is plain an simple advantage (why else is everybody pushing their service heights to the limit and beyond?).

And since I'm currently a bit bored, let's do some basic trigonometry to find out the different flattest possible angles between shuttle and top of the net. And let's assume that the players all serve from the same perfect position with the shuttle being directly over the front service line:

for h=1.05:
β = ~76°

for h=1.15:
β = ~78°

for h=1.25:
β = ~83°

Although I have no idea of how much impact these couple of degrees have in reality. And the thought just crosses my mind how embarassing it would be if I had messed up that high school math there...

swsh and stanleyfm like this.
4. Yoji Regular Member

Joined:
Apr 3, 2017
Messages:
5,400
858
Location:
Singapore
Over the years, biggie and tallie always have advantage.

I dont think shortie have advantage now just that tallie advantage being neutralised now so its more of the same playing field.

5. s_mair Regular Member

Joined:
Oct 10, 2013
Messages:
4,042
2,247
Location:
Germany
This discussion is revolving in such quick circles, I'm starting to feel dizzy....

6. SSSSNT Regular Member

Joined:
Oct 9, 2011
Messages:
569
94
Location:
Here
I've already said the only way they are disadvantaged is compared to current rules. Which is what you're talking about. So we agree there.

I was replying to someone saying they are disadvantaged in having to worry about being called for foul serving. Which is false if they practice.

7. speCulatius Regular Member

Joined:
May 17, 2017
Messages:
708
657
Location:
'round here....
If that was true, there would be no foul serves right now.

8. SSSSNT Regular Member

Joined:
Oct 9, 2011
Messages:
569
94
Location:
Here
currently it's rather arbitrary.

9. Junye Regular Member

Joined:
Oct 18, 2005
Messages:
897
349
Occupation:
Location:
Singapore
In addition to the 1.15m rule....

Be prepared for a new scoring system in badminton.

It is learnt that the Badminton World Federation (BWF) council have agreed, in principle, to change the scoring format from the 21x3 rally to 11x5 after a recent meeting in Montego Bay, Jamaica.

The world body are expected to make a decision at their annual general meeting (AGM) in Bangkok next May during the Thomas-Uber Cup Finals.

And it looks like the members are ready for a change.

The 11x5 system will be set to a maximum of 15 points when the score reaches 10-10.

The current 21-point best-of-three-game scoring format was introduced 10 years ago.

“This change involves amending the rule of the game. It has to come through the AGM. The council, in principle, have agreed and have recommended for the new scoring format,” said a source.

s_mair likes this.
10. s_mair Regular Member

Joined:
Oct 10, 2013
Messages:
4,042
2,247
Location:
Germany
In case you haven't seen the corresponding thread, here it is:

It's just logical that they decide what to do for the future after testing the new scoring for so long.

11. speCulatius Regular Member

Joined:
May 17, 2017
Messages:
708
657
Location:
'round here....
And there are a lot of foul serves that are not being called... Like I said before: I think changing it to a fixed height will have a positive effect, but why 1,15? Why not 1,25 (or any other random number)? Why not choose a height that allows most players to stick with their routine? Nobody will be attracted by a sport they don't understand at all. Nobody will be attracted to a sport that doesn't happen, because it'll be over before the rally started. Like you said, right now, it's arbitrary. If it's not any more, more foul serves will be called if they happen (if not, that change is useless). But what's not arbitrary about 1,15? It's right in the middle to divide the group of players into those who will be forced to change their game and those who don't need to and only can change if they want to have an advantage of those new rules.

I'm aware that size makes a difference, but if you want to change that, you should not start with the serve, but some other things like
1. Limiting the length of one step you are allowed to make
2. Limiting the height of the point where you hit the shuttle
3. Don't allow small players to take shots above their head in front of the service line
....

Everybody is different (and that's great), but not every difference is a (dis)advantage.

So again and back to topic: Why would choosing a height that will cause less faults during serve be worse than 1,15?

Joined:
Apr 30, 2011
Messages:
576
241
Location:
Norway
I believe one most important consideration, when deciding service rules, is to create a very fine balance where no side gets an advantage during the serve situation. I am quite confident that service height has an ideal height point where it will not let the receiver attack every serve and at the same time not force the receiver to play so much upwards that the service return can be easily attacked back. I think the 1.15 is that number that from intensive testing showed to be optimal.

As it is now, low players get their serve attacked much more often than very tall players. And also it is much harder to make a good return against very tall player's well executed serve and I can see the return more often goes into the net as well...

#252
Last edited: Dec 4, 2017
13. Tactim Regular Member

Joined:
Sep 18, 2010
Messages:
922
60
Occupation:
Nurse
Location:
Nor Cal
To perhaps provide a different perspective on serving rules, what is reason that serves HAVE to be equal that no side gets an advantage? One might say that the although taller players may have an advantage with a higher service contact point, they don't have the same mobility and speed as players who are shorter.

I understand that the point of the service rule change is to create consistency and put a real number to the height limit of the serve so that there is no room for debate, just if the serve is above 1.15m or no.

Time will tell to see how much pushback the BWF gets from this when the all england come saround.

Joined:
Apr 30, 2011
Messages:
576
241
Location:
Norway
When I said "no side gets an advantage" I meant between server and receiver, not between players of different height...

15. Tactim Regular Member

Joined:
Sep 18, 2010
Messages:
922
60
Occupation:
Nurse
Location:
Nor Cal
Same thing still applies, what is wrong with a tall player having an advantage in the service situation? I'm sure it is difficult to play against I'm sure, but the player's height comes with its share of physical disadvantages as well. Either way, I'm sure this has been debated numerous times by the BWF but clearly they made a decision to trial it at a major tournament and will make a decision based on that tournament's results to move forward or scrap it.

speCulatius likes this.
16. thyrif Regular Member

Joined:
Jul 16, 2015
Messages:
323
217
Location:
Netherlands
I want this for my club, some people are gonna be so pissed

(edit: better picture)

#256
Last edited: Dec 5, 2017
pcll99, stanleyfm and phihag like this.

Joined:
Apr 30, 2011
Messages:
576
241
Location:
Norway
The service situation is very important as you know. There are like fifteen rules that deal with avoiding a player having an advantage during the service. You do realize how ridiculuos it sounds when you say "what is wrong with a tall player having an advantage in the service situation"? .

The simple answer is : everything .

To clarify... the service rules are not made to limit the advantage of some players over the others but rather to make an equal chance in service situation so that no one gets an unfair advantage and that the service than can successfully continue into the rally... The rally is what makes the badminton game, and ideally we want to get through the service with equal opportunity to all the players...

18. pcll99 Regular Member

Joined:
Nov 19, 2009
Messages:
8,638
602
Occupation:
Cylon
Location:
N/A
my club just hired a team of expert land surveyors...

19. Littlejohn Regular Member

Joined:
Oct 25, 2012
Messages:
61
14
Occupation:
Lazy Bum
Location:
Leighton Buzzard
Interesting that nobody has commented on how big an advantage tall player have in being able to get steeper angles on their smashes

Joined:
Apr 30, 2011
Messages:
576
241
Location:
Norway
Right! And also the ability of very low players to take the shuttle off the floor..

#260
Last edited: Dec 5, 2017
phihag likes this.