I honestly think LD's game has dropped a lot recently. He doens't attack as much as he use to, nor does he use his speed to his advantage as much as he use to. I think CH is like LD, both thier games have dropped some what in the past few months. Tafuik on the other hand has always been consistent at winning big events, though he rarely shows up to the smaller events. From what i saw at the WC's, LD's route to the finals were MUCH harder. Not based on purely the player, but the player and the type of day they were having. He played Sato who played with much heart, but still went down in 3. LHI played extremely well, pushing LD into 3 sets. Then who can forget his match against Gade(i cheered for Gade ). Marathon match that seemed to take a toll on both of them physical and mentally. Taufik on also had his fair share of splits. He split with Ponsana in the round of 16, but he was very relaxed the 2nd set, and once he lost that he broke his racket and then decided to win the third one comfortabley. His match vs KJ was odd. He got trashed the first set, but he took the last two sets rather easily. In the SF vs LCW, he destroyed him showing LCW his top form. Then comes the fials between the two, LD never got into it the first game. The 2nd came he tried to hold on, but Taufik wouldn't let him take it. I say at the WC Taufik was defintely the better palyer, but i don't agree that he is the better play in GENERAL. I think their draws made a huge difference. What if BCL played Taufik, would things have panned our differently? Taufik has admited that he's bad vs BCL. I just know from watching LD at the WC, im somewhat dissapoitned in him, i have videos of him from older tournaments werhe he turns up the gas and just obliterates ppl. But at wC's, he was somewhat slow and seemed lazy/defensive the entire time. And tahst my long two cents.. gosh i had insomnia
FYI, #1, it's "BEEN THERE, DONE THAT" for Taufik. The guy has done it all already, nothing to prove, well except may be All England. As for Lin Dan, we know and he knows he is #1 by name but hasn't got heavy credentials (by winning big tournaments) to back it. And that kind of fells 'hollow'. Ask Kim Clijster that, until she recently made a breakthrough in US Open (I quote tennis as an example). After all, when you're #1, where else can you go but to go down. No matter how consistent LD is, one day he'll be #2 or #20 so it's all downhill for him. Nothing is forever. As far as history or what they (LD or TH) will be remembered, (for now) both will be remembered as being #1 but only Taufik as #1, Olympic Champion and World Champion. When you don't rate someone who has been #1, OC, WC, I wonder who you rate? BTW, that guy who wins 5 Grand Slams and has been #1 for 2 years in tennis is Roger Federer, I wonder if you rate him at all?
Exactly, no prizes for number, no one is remembered for being number one, they are remembered for winning big tournaments, and sweeping all before them.
Let me make this clear, are you guys comparing who is the best amongst all the players or who is better among LIN and HIDAYAT ? If you are comparing who's the best among all then it is pointless. Take a look at this head to head stats (you can grab this from IBF website) : LIN VS HIDAYAT (2-3) LIN VS GADE (7-1) GADE VS HIDAYAT (7-5) So , who's the best ? LIN is better than GADE but GADE is better than HIDAYAT but HIDAYAT is better than LIN but LIN is better than GADE but GADE is better than HIDAYAT but HIDAYAT is better than LIN but ... and it goes on . Badminton is not math problem, it won't be necessary a > b > c and thus "a" is greatest. In this situation its a > b , b > c but c > a . Every player has it's strengths and weaknesses. "A" may defeat "B" easily but have a hard time defeating "C" however "B" may find it really easy defeating "C". If you are also a badminton player you should know what I mean. Have you ever had an experience before where you could easily take your friend but your friend has no problem taking an opponent that you find it hard to deal with? In conclusion, if we really rating the "BEST" amongst all players, we should just go accoding to the ranking (and there goes the ranking system). However, if we are just comparing between LIN and HIDAYAT, then obviously LIN had hard times playing with HIDAYAT. And according to head to head stats HIDAYAT has advantage against LIN.
hi there, just wish to make a correction. The corrrect record for Taufik-Lin Dan head to head is 5-2 in favor of Taufik. Please read this whole thread for details. The IBF's record is inaccurate.
lol, but this thread has gone a lil out of topic indeed, its like the thread's title is : "Who's better, lin dan or taufik hidayat?", lol, but thats fine, its exciting tho if i have to go back to the topic about why he is #1, its becos his consistency, since in terms of talent, or anything else, at least there are 2 or 3 players that can compare to lin dan, though now people are talking about how he wasnt as invincible as before, i think he is still the most consistent player today, he NEVER, as long as ican remember, lost before semifinal, whereas taufik,,,,well
you are right. Hi, you forgot the Athens Olympic, that's when he lost before semifinal and Taufik is the gold medallist.
Well this used to be true until recently after Hidayat got his game back. I am not so sure Gade can hold his ground against Hidayat anymore. I mean Hidayat annihilate Gade in the second set of the Surdiman cup.
kinda out of topic, but can anyone tell me who has occupied the world number 1 (IBF ranking) for the longest time in history? could that be LD???
The argument is why Lin Dan is #1 (as the title of the thread) and more implicitly, (unfortunately) not the worthiness of the rank but quite the opposite. #1 by CONSISTENTLY winning smaller tournaments and yet CONSISTENTLY losing to Taufik who is #6 (or #7 at times) cannot be a good measure. Comparing all players by ranking is subjective as well because clearly LD is not better than TH. So, the question now is "Does LD deserve to be #1?" or rather the ranking system of IBF is somehow inaccurate. Perhaps they should have much more weighting for big tournaments.
I tend to agree with that, but is TH no.1 then ? NO. As I mentioned in previous post badminton is not math. TH is better than LD but is not better than other players where LD is better than them. It's no point arguing on that. A beats B and B beats C but C beats A, end of story. I think they did. The points the players collect are based on how big the tournament is, ie. 6 stars tournament will gain more points than 5 stars. Having said that, that's the best ranking system that one could think of and that's the best way to determine who is no.1.
Wheter it used to be true or not or its still true it doesn't matter. I'm just taking peter gade to put in between them as an example. My point is, no particular player could beat ALL of the other players to stand as the BEST. Badminton is no math.
currently the winner of a 7* gets 6000points, 6* 5400, 5* 4800, 4* 4200, 3*3600, 2* 2000, 1* 2400 600 point gap between stars. also remember that the 1* to 6* are decided on the prize money avaliable and only loosely related to prestige while the 7* are obviously very big titles. also going out at the semi final of a 7* gets you the same points as winning a 4*. going out at the quarterfinals at a 7* gets less than a 3* tournament win. i think the current system is fine and quite well balanced. since there are only limited 7* tournaments, the differences between the 3*-6* points are not too spread out. notice it is also a linear relationship, and not exponential since there is no need to make it exponential. make it too exponential and no one in the top 10-20 will be going to 3* events anymore. and since the 1*-6* system is linear, there is no need to make the 7* points increase exponentially.
The reason why Lin Dan is ranked number one is because he got more ranking points than anyone else. Lin Dan is currently the world ranked #1 player. Taufik is currently the world and Olympic title-holder. And that is that.
WinnAR! Lin Dan is the #1 Ranked Player based on the IBF point system; while Taufik is...you guy and gals know the rest.
for me, Taufik Hidayat is the best in MS. His ranking low because of he didn't participate many tournaments. Lin Dan only can be the champion without the particapation of Taufik. That makes Lin Dan at the top ranking. Taufik still the best ....
Not sure how this forum works, but other forums I'm been in (non-badminton ones), this topic would have been locked. Everyone has their opinions and everyone is entitled to them, but lots of post are surely off topic by miles!
The more diverse the opinions the more tolerant we become. Locking at the drop of a hat somewhat locks your mind, don't you agree.
