Recent years, many people in the field of Badminton are talking about Badminton's reformation, and the IBF had adopted some steps such as new scoring system for attracting telecast. But, these didn't smooth something in contradiction with telecast. I think there is a conflict in TV broadcasting, namely, time is random in a game. I still remembered the men’s single contest between Sun Jun and Peter Rasmussen in 1997 World Championships. In that competition, they played more than 2 hours, it’s too long not to our Badminton fans but to TV and other spectators (personally, I think it is more important for Badminton to attract “no fans” all over the world and make them become fans ultimately). If all Badminton competitions always did so, maybe, they would not have seemed too bad, however, there are others seemed too short such as the contest between Gong Zhichao and Camilla Martin in 2001 World Championships-no more than 26 minutes, and some others are on more than 20 minutes! It is a difficult to TV broadcasting indeed. We often complain no telecast for Badminton, but how many hours should they prepare for a telecast? One hour, two, three or four hours? If the contest is like 1997 World Championships, then five individual finals need 10 hours at least; and if it is like 1999 World Championships, 2 hours should be enough! 2-10 hours! No wonder there are a few telecasts for Badminton. We must change this case if we want Badminton to get more chance before TV. Fist, we should think what make random among these contests. Maybe many reasons lead to this result, however, one should be the most important thing, namely, the sever rights that the competitors scrabble for frequently for one score in a close game and almost needn’t change in a lean-to-one-side one. If we reform Badminton to bout scoring system like Volleyball, maybe, we can settle this problem (personally, I think either 3x15 or 5x7 or 5x9 can not settle this problem if one player before getting a score must have a sever right) , after all, to some extent a fixed time game is very good to the telecast. On the other hand, I think team events are too long and too illogical such as Sudirman Cup, Thomas & Uber Cup. T&U Cup, for instance, best of 5 that is much better than best of 9 used formerly only if considering time, however, there is a more important problem (I think, than time)that singles and doubles participating in game must be ordered according to world ranking from the IBF. I think that's nonsense. The world ranking isn't all to a player to some extent, Peter Rasmussen, for example too, 2002 European Men's singles Champion is only a third singles in Denmark team for Thomas Cup, That’s crazy! European No.1 is only No.3 in Denmark of Europe. I'm sure it's very unfair to other teams and to Denmark itself and to Rasmussen himself and to spectator and to Thomas Cup itself and Badminton itself ultimately. So does Uber Cup. If the IBF adopts 5x15 without a server right for a point, it'll be different from now. IBF can use 5x15 in individual events, and use 3x15 in best of 9 or 5 team events (for T&U C or for Sudirman Cup) with no time extending. If the IBF do so, individual events are not too long and too short (like Table Tennis) and team events are not too long (Sudieman Cup) and too illogical (T&U C) to attract spectator. It's also benefit to TV broadcasting and to Badminton itself ultimately. I hope the IBF can introduce more rational means to develop Badminton in behalf of Badminton itself all over the world, not in behalf of a certain continent, I also hope every continental Badminton Federation or confederation or Union does so too.
The time-allotment problem is generally solved by showing the event on tape delay. The broadcasters would set aside a certain amount of time, say one hour. If the match goes longer, they would edit out parts they consider not essential. If the match is shorter, they would have fillers prepared, such as interviews and features, to take up the time.
No. No offense to you, but I hate this rally point crap that has been forced on Volleyball. Unless one team is totally outclassing the other, the score is often quite close, like within 5 points out of the total 25. It allows weaker teams to upset stronger teams easily. With "old" scoring, you have to work for the point, and you can't rely on your opposition to make a mistake to gain your points. With rally point scoring, a good team could simply miss a few serves in a row, and which would allow the other team to catch up. Whereas, if they were using the "old" scoring method, the good teams' serving errors would not benifit the other team much except for giving up serve. I remember close volleyball games where the possesion of serve would go back and forth endlessly, much to my enjoyment. When you were done playing, and if you won, it was a feeling of accomplishment, like "we worked for it." Now, with rally point scoring, if you win, it's like "I'm glad that team missed their serve so we won." In other words, often the victory doesn't feel like it has been worked hard for. In badminton, when I win a close singles game in a tournament, especially if I was down by many points, it is a great sense of accomplishment. In this past season for my high school volleyball team, I only remember one game where we came back from a 6 point defecit and won. Our team was ranked third of twelve going into playoffs. What typically happens in volleyball games is that one team will get ahead by a few points, and barring any string of mistakes, will win almost always in my experience. Ugh. Sorry, but I have been disgusted with the rules put in Volleyball recently to "dumb down" the sport. Serves can now hit the net, rally point scoring, etc. This allows any bunch of dumbos to gather on a court and take on a good team. Xu Zhen, don't take me wrong. I appreciate that you are trying to think of ways to help badminton gain publicity, which is exactly what it needs. However, I strongly feel that rally point scoring is not the right step for badminton, and was a wrong step for volleyball. Captain of his high school Volleyball team , Phil
New Scoring System New Scoring System should be as follows: 1. in individual competitions: All five events are adopted 5x15 (rally point); 2. in team competitions: 1). Men’s and Women’s team events: 1st match: singles adopted 3x15 (rally point) 2nd match: doubles adopted 3x15 (rally point) 3rd match: singles adopted 3x15 (rally point) 4th match: doubles adopted 3x15 (rally point) 5th match: singles adopted 3x15 (rally point) 6th match: doubles adopted 3x15 (rally point) 7th match: singles adopted 3x15 (rally point) 8th match: doubles adopted 3x15 (rally point) 9th match: singles adopted 3x15 (rally point) 2). Mixed team event: 1st match: mixed doubles adopted 3x15 (rally point) 2nd match: men’s singles adopted 3x15 (rally point) 3rd match: women’s singles adopted 3x15 (rally point) 4th match: men’s doubles adopted 3x15 (rally point) 5th match: women’s doubles adopted 3x15 (rally point)
I believe the bottom line is "MONEY". I see TV has no problem with Tennis(similar to Badminton), it can stretch from 2 sets to ...... If the event has popularity, with enough advertisements(money), then TV will work with IBF to adjust its timimg to broadcast it. Eventhough, Badminton is a worldwide sport, but compares to other sports, it's still consider small Events. The bottom line is we need to encourage more ppl to play badminton.
I think in Canada/United States don't broadcast badminton on air is because they don't really have any really pro players. Plus, they don't invest much on badminton players.
Ouch! Xu Zhen, I'm sure that you bring up some very fine points in your post above but it literally hurts my eyes to try read a long monolgue such as yours that is not arranged into coherent paragraphs. What is even worse is when other ppl write these long messages w/o using any capital letters at all. Usually when I see long posts like these, I don't bother reading them at all cuz' I know that it will give me a headache before I even get to the end... this is not an exaggeration at all. Check out Phil's reply above for a post that uses a paragraph structure to make reading much easier. This format also helps to organize various ideas that are contained in the message.
what about in tennis when theres rain delays all the time? that doesnt' stop them they show footage from the day before - or highlights or footage from classic matches ... or talk about the tournament i dont think *Time* is that much of a problem... i think thats just an excuse if a match is too long they need to abbreviate it or show it over 2 sessions or something.
I think there needs to be agressive advertisement on the promoters' part. As for the players, I think that there needs to be more sponsors, and money going into badminton. There simply isn't any money in playing badminton in North America, actually, there is, and that's the players' own money. They have to pay for themselves for accomodations and other fees while going to a tournament. The problem with badminton in North America is that it does not get any respect. People that don't like football or hockey still respect it as a sport, even though they do not enjoy the sport. The general public regards badminton as a pussy backyard game. Badminton does not get respect from the general public.
My question is: do the all these crappy changes to volleyball attract more TV rating? I don't know the offical statistics. But I still don't see major networks showing any volleyballs. To make badminton popular in US, the most important factor to train some world class players in US. Why major TV networks are showing beach volleyball instead of indoor volleyball, because US players are dominating the sports.
