Yo! So we talk a lot about footwork, and how to improve our footwork. But here's a discussion in particular I want to look at, does increasing your speed (i.e, your agility and strength in your legs) improve your footwork moreso than technique in your movements? First off, I want this discussion to be reasonable, so we don't want to talk about outliers. We don't want to look at 2 week 26 year old body builder beginners, who have loads of strength and no technique, and we don't want to look at 78 year old long time players with arthritis, tons of technique but no strength. In this regard, I think it's obvious we would all agree that we need some of each, some strength, some technique. What I want to focus on more, is the intermediate and advanced players, and differences in movement styles for professionals. Some obvious differences in footwork: Height and weight are two really obvious ones, we could always suggest discipline too. The 7ft tall singles player and 5'4 MD player will move differently. Two people who are 6', but one weighs 100kg, and the other 60, will also move very differently. What is speed? Simply put, the time taken from Point A to point B. What is technique? Technique includes the details, such as how you lunge, the length of your chasses, lunges etc. Now, here's the key point of the discussion. Particularly in tournaments, of all levels, and it's most notable in singles, when a player is losing, and they want to up the ante of the game to try and keep pace, they will increase their speed. They will make stronger movements, deeper lunges, more jumps. They will exercise athleticism and strength to try and achieve their goal. What I've seen in these instances, is that it usually results in a significant sacrifice to technique. Players often rush the net so hard, they can barely stop themselves running into it, with both feet next to each other almost under the net - I'm sure someone here on BC will have seen the same thing. I've seen someone try to lunge so deep, they've hit their non-racket knee on the ground. I've seen dives, leaps backwards, and all sorts. I am not convinced this injection of speed, to try and keep pace, is actually useful in playing against stronger players. They will be moving faster, and they'll be doing so to try and keep pace or dominate the rally, but it actually results in far greater recovery times and difficulties in movement. We can sometimes see this even at SS level, particularly with the younger players, who try to up this pace but in sacrifice of technique. Currently I'm of the mindset that increasing your speed in this way only ends up harmful to your game. It hits your rhythm, your recovery, and burns up stamina. I believe it results in a net loss of time and aptitude in your gameplay. What do you think BC? Is it worth increasing your speed in this fashion, through athleticism, rather than technique and familiarity with the movements?
We can sometimes see this even at SS level, particularly with the younger players, who try to up this pace but in sacrifice of technique. Out of curiousity, who would these players be? I've seen players with questionable footwork technique at Superseries level, but never to the extent you describe (fumbling and scrambling around lol). Currently I'm of the mindset that increasing your speed in this way only ends up harmful to your game. It hits your rhythm, your recovery, and burns up stamina. I believe it results in a net loss of time and aptitude in your gameplay. What do you think BC? Is it worth increasing your speed in this fashion, through athleticism, rather than technique and familiarity with the movements? Using the correct footwork patterns under pressure-situations is a technique in and of itself. You have to learn to move with the proper steps even against someone of higher skill/speed. So in the situations you described above, I would say their footwork technique still needs work. Example: LCW vs. #20-30 world-ranking player (basically what you see in the 1st or 2nd round of Superseries). Obviously LCW is faster and will outpace his opponents, but they will not suddenly forget their footwork technique (lunging with non-dominant leg, taking chicken steps, etc). In these cases, it is now a situation where the athlete can benefit more by focusing on strength rather than technique.
Players like Shi Yuqi and a younger VA come to mind. It's not so much as fumbling, and not so much as absolute incorrect technique as you've said chicken steps or non-dominant leg lunges. When they increase their speed in this way, the footwork just loses its fullness, it's not pristine anymore. Because they're exerting so much force into their footwork, it ends up somewhat uncontrolled, which then requires them to compensate. I think one prominent way to see this is to watch the short exhibitions between SS players and the older junior players (U17/U19), when the SS players dominate the rally heavily and dictate it. Even those these juniors will likely floor any of us, they lose the composure in their footwork, and end up rushed, hurried, and lacking in control. So ya it's not so much that they regress to beginner standards, but rather, their footwork loses polish, and ends up more clumsy and uncontrolled. This in turn severely impacts recovery.
Players like Shi Yuqi and a younger VA come to mind. I watched a bit of LCW vs. Shi Yuqi at All England 2017 and I know what you mean now. It wasn't a pleasant sight . I think one prominent way to see this is to watch the short exhibitions between SS players and the older junior players (U17/U19), when the SS players dominate the rally heavily and dictate it. Even those these juniors will likely floor any of us, they lose the composure in their footwork, and end up rushed, hurried, and lacking in control. You're right, I think I took your previous post too extreme. However, I still believe in these situations the low-level players will benefit more from strength training rather than improving footwork technique. They still have all the proper steps (split step, chasse, correct lunging, etc) but they look clumsy and jittery because they're demanding power from their legs which they simply cannot produce yet (or at least produce efficiently). I'm curious to see if anyone would recommend more footwork technique training in these situations and why.
If using more strength and power leads to a breakdown of technique, then it wasn't worth it as far as I am concerned. A player should practice moving faster and more powerfully, and be able to do that if required. From what you are describing, the player is trying to move and play at a pace beyond what they are capable of - I agree that its not worth it. But then again, what else would they/should they do? This may have been how they won close matches in the past, and they have learnt that trying harder leads to more points won. As they mature, they realise that by perfecting their technique and improve their shots quality and consistency, they realise they don't have to scramble to try and win points -they can just get everything back. With this in mind, I believe that improving your technique is far more important than developing athleticism. Footwork is a skill, just like all racket skills, and requires dedicated practice, just like shots do. Skipping, lunging and squatting won't give you good technique, but will give you some strength, which always helps My main feeling with regard to technique deficiency when moving is when players move to the back of the court: 1. On the forehand side, they don't turn their body enough 2. On the round the head movement, they don't turn their body enough 3. They are usually too high and bouncy which ruins their timing - instead, stay low, stay on the floor, and commit to a high quality shot!! I also think recovery from the forecourt is a huge issue - so many wasted steps for most players... If you fixed those things, it allows someone to actually get to the shuttle and play a high quality shot regardless of how early or late you take it. However, most people just think they need more speed You really need greater commitment to the quality of the shot.
My main feeling with regard to technique deficiency when moving is when players move to the back of the court: 1. On the forehand side, they don't turn their body enough 2. On the round the head movement, they don't turn their body enough 3. They are usually too high and bouncy which ruins their timing - instead, stay low, stay on the floor, and commit to a high quality shot! @MSeeley Your points are really good, but they seem to be directed at lower-level players with limited footwork technique. What are your thoughts on advanced-level players with solid footwork technique, which is the group Charlie was directing his original post at. Do you still feel that they should prioritize footwork technique over strength training?
I will give the obvious answer: yes its worth ANY change in tactics, if it is a winning strategy i.e. if it always results in them making a huge number of unforced errors, then its not worth it. If they will never win the match with their current tactics, then it is worth trying (but players are not often very good judges of this sort of thing). I believe this is particularly true for young professionals - they up their pace because they think they have no other way to win. In reality, a change in tactics and more thoughtfulness may have won them the match. However, not many players have that kind of calmness and focus (think Peter Gade - a master tactician who frequently worked out how to beat tricky opponents).
What do you mean by advanced level? I would consider county players to be advanced, and many of them have glaring technique deficiencies. Especially when you consider junior players who will have been winning a lot, and have a very high standard of play, but are still extremely vulnerable footwork technique wise when they then play against e.g. an ex-professional who can expose those weaknesses (don't look at me - I am not fast enough or accurate enough to make them pay for their mistakes). When it comes to professionals, then I think its very difficult to criticise anyones technique. But take Chen Long when he first started playing after the juniors - he couldn't come close to beating LCW because his technique in defence (i.e. his agility) just wasn't good enough. He worked hard on it, and now has a completely different technique (his stance is much lower, knees bent etc) which enables him to defend against anyone. Look at Victor Axelson - another tall player who lacked agility, and worked with a gymnastics coach thus improving his defence and his round the head attack. Both players did significant physical conditioning (strength, flexibility, agility, balance etc) to enable better court coverage through what I would consider better technique (lower centre of gravity etc). But is this simply labelled "improved defence"? which includes better footwork technique? etc etc etc. Its a tricky topic to define without knowing what is "technique" and what isn't. From my view, better defence IS a technique (involving footwork and racket skills) and is probably the main technical problem for professional players - especially when its a junior player making a transition to senior badminton. But to achieve this change, a huge amount of physical and technical work is required. To be honest, when considering really high level players, it doesn't even make sense to seperate footwork "technique" versus "strength". What they actually need is better "defense", or better "attack" - both of which involve footwork, and these requirements change whether you need better singles defence in the rearcourt, or forecourt, or midcourt... or doubles defence? Or mid court attack? Or front court attack? Or full blown overhead attack?
Not in high levels, but in intermediate level I see this and it drives me nuts. I play with some people who have basically no footwork, but are crazy fast. So they think they are good because they can return a lot of shots due to sheer speed. But to use the speed means they are all over the court, with no apparent pattern and it's dangerous because they just run around "full steam ahead" with no regard for their partner. When I am their partner I pay more attention to them then the birdie. And while they can win with intermediate partners, they fall apart pretty quickly even with an upper-intermediate. But it's hard to convince them they aren't playing right because they just counter with "I return all the shots, how can that not be right?" I have one friend who wears his shoes pretty thin and has a kind of sliding step worked into his strategy. It kills me to watch him but he is fast and against regular "weekend" players he wins a lot so he isn't willing to actually learn any footwork.
I can relate to this. In our team in the office (we are all beginners ), we had this team member who was crazy fast. He was so fast that he can get to the birdie from the back of the court to the net, "overtaking" his teammate who was on the net position. I feel tired just looking at him while playing but he had a lot of stamina. It seems that he never gets tired .
In training sessions, I would prioritize technique over speed. Learn the proper movements first, increase the speed as one gets more comfortable and further improvements with physical conditioning and coordination. Take me for example, I was told by my coach that my footwork was not good - the form was good, but lacking physical strength and coordination. What I am trying to say here, good footwork is not just the form, it also requires physical ability and coordination to have it executed. You can take your technique to a different level with higher physical ability.
Yeah, I think speed is not the goal. Proper technique is the goal and speed should naturally come with it. The best players take the fewest steps, yet each step is efficient and deliberate with speed and power worked into the footwork. I have one of those wrist pedometers and over time my "steps" taken during a game are getting lower and lower as I'm improving my actual game so I consider that a good sign.
It depends on the situation. In a match, the objective is to return the shuttle to your opponent's court. Ideally the return shot should be of high quality, which includes power, accuracy and speed. Depending on the conditions, speed may take priority over everything else here. Training is different. The shortcomings felt during match situations could be addressed here. Fewer steps may indicate better power or more efficient footwork. This also depends if your coverage is used on - in Chinese terms, 'on the initiative'; but on 'defensive' is the speed/rhytm of your steps that counts.
Well, I mean like getting across the court diagonally. Originally it took me 5-6 steps. Now I can get across is on 2-3 and I'm still not as good as my coach who can do it in 2 easy. So by improving my footwork I naturally improved my speed because 2-3 steps is always gonna be quicker then 5-6. Can I also move quicker? Sure. No doubt. But it will take a lot more effort as I will need to improve my muscles and body health. By improving my footwork I upped my speed almost immediately just by changing the way I moved. That's what I mean by improving footwork brings speed along with it. But once you have decent footwork you'll need to find other ways to improve your speed because of course, both are vital.
I'm not particularly quick however I did just win the dads race at my little girls sports days , but I seem to move around the court well so for me its more about technique and been able to read the game I would also add core strength and balance. so instead of training from getting to A to B as fast you can I would see what is the most effective way of doing it and when you find your style and rhythm the speed will come naturally with that.
