Speed or power?

Neither is more important than the other - you need both, along with finesse, stamina, tactics, reactions, etc...
The winner in your hypothetical situation is dependent on how you define "acceptable" and "lots of" (it's impossible to say Player A has exactly as much power as Player B has speed).

Also, you have to look at how the players match up in a range of areas.

eg.
Player A has loads of power but is weak in other areas.
Player B has poor defense but is great in other areas.
Player C has great defense and is average in other areas.

Player A could beat Player B - his power would simply be too much for him to handle.
Player C could beat Player A - his great defense would negate A's big strength, and C is better in other areas.
Player B could beat Player C - he has better all-round ability, and his weak defense doesn't matter against B's average power.

So overall: A > B > C > A

This is by no means unusual.

 

You have two questions here really: Is speed more desirable than power for effective play? Is power more desirable than speed to make people go "wow". The answer is to both is yes.

Since it looks like you are from Montreal, here it is again in hockey terms. The crowd goes crazy for big defencemen delivering bone-crushing checks and blistering slapshots that hit the net 20% of the time. But the games are won by those speedy wingers' quick hands around the net.

Brain + Speed = winner. (if you have no tactics/strategy, speed won't win. We all see that.)

 

It's not easy to compare 2 elements of the game in isolation. Certainly thinking (i.e. strategy/tactic) is also important in this physical game. In the example by Sketchy, a power player doesn't always overwhelm a player with weak defense, if the latter knows how to avoid lifting, for example, thereby taking away the strength of the power player. Then again, there is time when speed (and I don't mean just footwork, but also racket speed) would be appropriate.

Even all else equal, but only these 2 elements are different, as someone already alluded to, it would still depend. E.g. would one is a lot faster than the other, but the latter only is slightly more powerful? Or the other way around? So here we are comparing not just the nature (speed vs. power), but the extent (how much).

Finally, the conclusion might also be different depending on which event we're talking about. Singles? Doubles? Mixed? In Doubles, are we talking about the front person or rear player? Speed vs power may play different roles there.

 

I'm just throwing this for discussion.

You can deny your opponent his power play but never his speed advantage.

 

Maybe not. Speed too can be denied. Deception could be the right tool.

 

But if the player has the speed, he still is able to reach the shuttle. Moreover, I feel that deception can only be done effectively if you have the speed as in you are taking the shuttle early, if you are taking shuttle late, your choices of shots are limited.

 

That begs a question which one is speedier LD or LCW??

 

Oh dear, please don't pull the antagonistic fans into this heretofore interesting theoretical discussion.

 

LOL i saw that coming

OK please go back to the topic

 

But then, whos one is more powerful LD or LCW??

LOL

 

That's probably true. I was thinking that speed perhaps is not just raw speed. I once read part of a book (forgot its name) that talks about how the pros tennis player could move so fast. Turns out they anticipate their opponents shots well. So their opponents body language signals a certain shot is coming.

Deception takes advantage of your opponent's over-anticipation. Once deceived a few times, he'd not be so eager any more, and would have to slow down.

At least that's what I was thinking. Not sure if this is correct.

 

I agree with what you are saying. There is an element of anticipation and it comes from experience. There's only certain shot choices available at a certain position.

For example, for some of the players in my group, when i hit to their backhand and I see them turning their back and using backhand, I know that they are unable to do a backhand clear and their return will be weak so my focus will be on the front of the court and I will prepare to smash a weak return.

Obviously, for the professional players, it is harder to anticipate what shot they play as they do have the ability/technique to play different type of shot even when they are caught in a bad situation but there are shots which you can outright discount because it is a low probability shot.

 

shots in badminton can be anticipated to some degree as well. But that comes with experience on the court.

If the OP is planning to improve on speed/power... It's dumb to think of it as an either/or scenario. Work on both upper body (power) and lower body (speed) conditioning at the same time. "specialists" are much easier to beat than well-rounded players.

 

You could just play a lot of drives/smashes straight at your opponent. I'm not suggesting that would be a very effective strategy, but it would completely take away any (movement) speed advantage they might have.

I think generally speaking, at lower levels of play, power trumps everything else, as defense tends to be relatively poor.
At an intermediate level, any kind of player can be successful, provided they adopt a strategy which plays to their strengths and their opponents' weaknesses.
At an advanced level of play, you'd better have plenty of speed AND power, or you're going to be screwed.

 

In my opinion a person who has a powerful smash and is slow is usually overweight and person who is fast around the court but has a weak smash has bad technique as generally people who have fast leg speed have fast arm speed aswell so should have a good smash.

As a player I prefer playing with somebody with a good smash over speed but as an opponent at singles reckon I fancy my chances better against a smasher than somebody with speed. Provided both players are equal in other areas.

One of the really good things about badminton is even when your days as a decent singles player are limited you can still be a useful doubles player. The best doubles players I have seen so far have been old guys

 

Nice conversation !!
Professional players don't they work to have good defense and attack along with speed ?

 

I would just like to add this into the discussion: Assume both players have exceptional racket skills - they don't miss hit shots, they CAN hit every shot in the book. Assume they are tactically reasonable, neither one is a genius that the other can't overcome. Who would be harder to beat? The guy who has a monstrous smash, but a bit slower, or the guy who is lightning fast, but has less raw strength? To my mind, the fast player sounds like a nightmare - he must have some average power by virtue of the good racket skills (remembering accuracy is of the utmost importance), he must have very good court coverage, AND very good skills - i think the pressure he places on you MAY be overwhelming, because he would seem to be everywhere at once! On the other hand, the guy with a monstrous smash, with excellent skills, but more limited court coverage, sounds like he can be outmanoeuvred...

I personally think these racket skills are exceptionally important. You can improve power, and speed/footwork efficiency etc. But good racket skills : drives/defense/netplay/slices/deception etc, these are so very important!

I would like to highlight that in terms of doubles, the best pair in the world, in my opinion, is cai yun and fu haifeng. One has a monstrous smash. One is incredibly quick, with his racket AND his feet (he used to be a singles player after all). I feel it is Cai Yun that wins the matches, NOT Fu Haifeng. I know Fu puts the shuttle on the floor a lot, but the pressure is built up by Cai in the front court, which wins the lift, which Fu puts on the floor.

The All England champions last year, danish pair Jonas Rasmussen and Lars Paaske, won that championship by the tactical brilliance and defense of lars paaske, and his racket speed/court coverage in the forecourt. This is a player, who doesn't have the power smash of most of the asian doubles players, but it doesn't matter a jot, because he commands and dominates every rally.

I guess you have got my point by now. I think you must have an excellent movement style (not necessarily very quick), followed by a complete set of racket skills to a very high standard. The next best thing to have is the very fast feet. Exceptional power is last on the list in my book. However, as others have said - the big smash looks very impressive... until you reach a professional standard, where your huge smash is sent straight back by some fantastic defender who then charges forwards to the net to win the rally. The smash looks good, but the defender looks even better

Thats my opinion on the subject!

Matt

 

I agree Fu HaiFeng has power but also Cai Yun has control but most Doubles players there is a powerful player and a control player on the court.
But in singles it is different Singles there is either a control or powerful player.
But now a days lots of Singles players are good at both.

 

I don't know how you can claim one player in a pair wins the matches.
To me, that just illustrates the importance of having two players who complement each other. I don't believe a pairing of two speedy guys (or two Cai Yuns) would be as effective - you need someone who's capable of making the most of half-chances and finishing off points (this is starting to remind me of NES Ice Hockey...)

If you look at mixed doubles, there's also a potential imbalance between the man's power and the lady's defense - which is typically weaker than the man's, even among professionals. This is something you really want to exploit, but to do so requires that the man can smash with power. Having said that, the man also has to cover 2/3 of the court, so he can't be too slow either.
If you're the lady playing mixed doubles, speed is certainly more useful than power, but neither is essential - it's far more important to have good anticipation, quick reactions, and quick hands.