Badminton will enter off season soon. It's a summary time for the ranking: Lin Dan still number 1 with 44893 ******* Lee CW no.2: 38463 *** Peter Gade no.3: 35629 ** Chen Jin no.4-5: 34459 ** Chen Hong no.4-5: 33810 or 34530 ** Bao CL no6.: 33245 * Lee HI no7.:31709 Chen Yu no.8-9: 28440 or 29160 ** Kenneth Jonassen no.8-9: 29118 Hafiz no.10: 26644 * That's the top 10 for the year of 2006 IBF ranking system gives too little for the title winners, it just got same points as winning the first round. How radiculous it is! So for the title winners, I denoted * for the title, the size indicates the star level of the tournaments. * means half chance to get it.
After considering the titles, my top 10 is: 1:Lin Dan 2:Chen Jin 3:Chen Hong 4:Bao CL 5:Lee CW 6:Peter Gade 7:Taufik 8:Chen Yu 9: Hafiz 10: [at large]
Lin Dan still number 1 with 44893 ********* Lee CW no.2: 38463 *** Peter Gade no.3: 35629 ** Chen Jin no.4-5: 34459 ** Chen Hong no.4-5: 33810 or 34530 ** Bao CL no6.: 33245 * Lee HI no7.:31709 Chen Yu no.8-9: 28440 or 29160 ** Kenneth Jonassen no.8-9: 29118 Hafiz no.10: 26644 * Got to give two more star to Lin Dan only for his unbeatable performance(equivalent to champion) at Thomas cup and Asia-Europe cup. Only Lin Dan got the star because he's the 1st men's single, and unbeatable, and also won the cups
@2cents, probably you should give star to BCL to for his also never lost performance in Thomas Cup as Second single. Maybe one star? Cause his job as second single are not tough as LD jo\ who had to play first single. Meanwhile IBF still had Netherland and Asian Games events for ranking points. Although I doubted that will make any difference. LD already assured of first place.
And again I agree with you about ranking points. Whats wrong with IBF or BWF about ranking points? Based on LD performance this year, he should got ahead so far with rank number 2. But thanks to IBF ranking points, the ranking points is quite close. Example: For Olympiade or World Champion events: Winner get 6000 points. Runner up get 5100 points. Only 15% less than the winner. Even a QF got 3300 points or more than 50% of winner points. Lets compare it with Tennis. A Grandsalm winner will get 1000 point. Runner up only get half of it or 500 points. QF got about 150 or 100 points. (Only 10-15% of the winner points.) No Wonder Roger Federer who won so many titles this year (11 including 3 Grandslam) is number one with more than 8000 ranking points. Rank 2 is Raphael Nadal who only had more than 4000 points. In other word, Raphael only had 50% of Roger points. Compare with LD and LCW. LD who won so many big events titles this year only lead LCW by 15% of his points. Absurd. At least in tennis caracking into top 10 ranking is very hard to do. You had to win titles or at least consistently reach SF and Final rounds of major events. But in badminton, you only had to reach lots of QF and SF sometimes to get into top 10. Even you can get into top 20 by winning lots of ef 1 star or Grade A tournaments.
If badminton wanted to compete with tennis or other already famous sport IBF should be really changes lots of stuff. The points for examples. And for linesman judge, maybe they should consider to using Intant Replay technology like tennis using rght now. I know its expensive ones, maybe only Top 5 events in one year will used that Instant Replay technology. Changing the name IBF to BWF will not help badminton become a global sport at all.
Well said, hcpoirot. I've never seen any organization as stupid as IBF. They just know nothing about logic, nothing about mathematics, nothing about business. I pointed this out many years ago when their hq in Europe, now after they moved to Asia, it's obvious that their IQ stays the same or gets even lower Some weird thing about ranking which even against common sense: At the one before last Thomas cup or Sudirman cup, Lin Dan beat all other first singles, beat Taufik twice, and won the cup, but got less points than Taufik. How ironic it was!!! Years back, Xia XZ won the German open, which made him lost #1 ranking. What a joke!!! As you said, winner takes 6000 points, loser takes 5100 points. So winning 5 titles get 600 less points than losing title 6 times. That's the reason, even Lin Dan won many big titles, but if he played only 9 tournaments, Lee CW would be the number 1. That's the reason, number 1 a week or 2 weeks in IBF ranking is nothing!!! That's the reason Lee HI, Roslin, Lee CW and many others had been there, because IBF system is not accurate at all. But under such coarse measures, you can keep number 1 for a year, such as Chen Hong did in whole year of 2002, that's extra-ordinary. Many people here disagreed what I said Chen Hong better than Lee HI. You cannot compare 1 year number 1 with 1 week number 1. 1 week(or maybe 2 weeks or even more weeks as long as there is no tournament) number 1 in IBF ranking is just an error.
I cannot do that (to give BCL bonus points). Only 1 star for 1 tournaments, otherwise, star will depreciate
yes, that's why i rarely look at the ibf's ranking table. here is my personal view in term of skill and potential to win, not how the draw is done 1. lin dan (in its own class) 2. chen hong 3. chen jin 4. LCW 5. chen yu 6. taufik 7. peter gade 8. bao chun lai 9. kenneth J 10. Lee HI
@baders I agree with 2cents here, acuse after those 9 MS, the others didn't do so well this year KJ included.
@2cents, Again agree with you about LD lost his number 1 crwon for almost 2 years cause he only play 9 events with excellent results this mid year. I already write so many times in BC that IBF should change their ranking points into more like tennis system. Look at Roger Federer, he only play 17 events one year but he is number one now with a huge leading ranking points, 7500 as today. Ranking number 3 Nikolay Davydenko from Russia enter more than 30 tournaments with only 3500 points. Why? Cause Roger this year won 11 major titles and 4 runner up. Thats why he had so huge point lead than the others. Meanwhile Nikolay only won 3 small events and one major events last week.Lots of QF and lots of lost in first or second round. Really, if badminton had like tennis point system, LD should be in rank 1 with a huge leading point from number 2 and the rest.
Anyway, i also wanted to made a list best of the best of badminton 2006. But it had to wait till Asian Games 2006 over.
ATP(tennis) will not count Asian Games. It is selective, only available for small number of players based on their associations whom to send. It's unfair for others not playing there.
up till now, based on skill: 1. lin dan 2. lee chong wei 3. peter gade????????????????????????????????????????? 4. chen hong or bao chun lai 5. chen hong or bao chun lai 6. chen jin 7. chen yu 8. lee hyun il 9. kenneth jonassen
Go...go... SuperDan. Dang, this guy is awesome. It seems that all other players are amateur, including Taufik. Yeah the best MS player of nowadays.
You are a bit carry-away here... just because he is better than other top players at the moment, does not mean the others are amateur. The others are still very good and talented, and they deserve a lot of credit and respect for their effort, even Taufik. Please avoid making statements like Indra when he talk about how good Taufik is.
you're so funny DinkAlot, i think indra will said s****n in indonesian languange now this year goes to lin dan congrats for him, rremember 2004 and 2005 goes to taufik as he were being chosen as the best player at that year
