I saw this pair who are great at moving around and defense but their offense are only average. Their main tactic seems to be safe, simple badminton. Long, slow rallies and pin people to the back line through lifts until their opponent make mistakes. Surprisingly this style is quite hard to beat (also annoying to play against). I was thinking, "this pair will do well against anyone on their skill level, maybe even slightly above" What style of doubles do you think is the hardest to beat in the intermediate level?
Lifting constantly only works if your opponents smash is not very powerful . Personally, I think it strongly depends on the playing style of you and your partner. For example, our style is quite offensive and is based on tight net play, hard smashes and fast movement. Being an offensive type player, the most annoying and difficult to beat opponents would simply be good at returning smashes. This is tough because it puts us out of our usual playing rhythm. However, good defense alone rarely wins badminton games. We came up with counter-defense tactics such as using tight drops to force a short lift, or simply smashing down the tramlines from one of the corners. In doubles, one must simply have good control of the net area and the baseline area in my opinion. The first provides attacking opportunities while the second acts on them.
My view is not on what style would win most games, but on what skills are most important to win. I believe that, at any level of play, consistency is the most important thing. Rallies are lost through errors, not won through winners (short lift is an error, rather than a smash being a winner). I think that players who have the strongest defensive skills will win more often than attackers. Someone with exceptional defence can play at and above their level, even if their attack is only average. They may not win, but they can play. Someone with a great smash but average defence will not stay in rallies long enough to win at a higher level. But thats just my view. Personally, I think having solid basics and very strong defence will lead you to win more games, than having a very good attack. It promotes fewer mistakes, which is a winning strategy. However, constantly lifting is not the sign of good defence - good defence involves plenty of counter attacking drives and blocks and lifts! I think even at an advanced level (or especially at an advanced level) where players all have similar skills, the players with the best defence will win.
I found the style I meant in the OP. Watch from 4:15 onwards. That's basically how they played. Of course, not as good as the legendary KDM and HTK.
I agree with the point you made here. Being able to return the shuttle is obviously the bare minimum required. Ideally speaking however, it is probably best to be in an attacking position because one can then control the rally better in my opinion. What do you think?
It comes down to one question. Would you prefer playing with a good attacking player but average in defence. Or would you want to play with a good defensive player but average in attack. From my experience, more points are lost during the rally is either the offensive side hit into the net or caught flat foot by a good counter attack shot. I rather have a good defensive player on my side if the skill levels are more or less the same.
Hmm... i think that honestly has to do with the skill level being somewhat lacking. I am an intermediate player and I usually only hit about 1/40 or 1/50 of my smashes in the net. Could you elaborate as to what type of counter attacking shot catches one flat footed? I'm thinking that it could only be a drop shot.
That's a really interesting thread. The more I think of it the harder it becomes to answer. I think if the doubles pair is really close to perfect at a particular style of play it's really tough anyway, but I know that the OP was talking about intermediate doubles. Those are the options: 1 - The defensive pair You keep on attacking and everything comes back, your smashes, your stick smashes, your fast drops and even your deceptive shots. Very frustrating indeed. Boils down to who will make the error first. Either your attack gets through or you'll make an error. 2 - The attacking pair They will try to kill every shot (basically pro MD). Every low serve will be driven or pushed back with interest, every flick will be killed. Your lifts will be smashed until the net player finishes the rally. Most of the times the pairing who is on the attack will win. 3 - The deceptive pair (very rare, if this pair exists at all, especially in doubles) I know this is not really likely, but if such a pair would exist, they'd try to deceive you until you play a weak shot and then they will go for the kill. Never seen it to be honest, just included it for the sake of completeness. Because usually deceptive play never wins a point in MD, it only gives a slight advantage at best. Deception is included in a lot of shots but not really a game plan in MD. 4 - The all-rounder This pair has great attacking and great defensive skills, they possess some deceptive shots and are good at reading the game. They vary their game a lot during the match. You never know which shot is coming. Smash? Slice? Punch clear? For me personally and from my experience, the hardest and the most annoying pair to beat would be number 4 - the all-rounder. Why? Because you never know what's coming, you never get into a good rhythm. Very frustrating indeed, because for all the other styles of play you can adjust your tactics and most of the time know what's coming (attack play, lifts, etc.), but not for this pair. If I had to rate them all, I'd say it goes like this from most frustrating and hardest to play to easiest: Allrounder > defensive > attacking > (deceptive) (All that is of course very hypothetical because at the highest level of MD defensive play gets you nowhere; you win by attacking play. But here we are talking about intermediate doubles.)
The all rounder pair may not necessarily be all rounded in skills but rather prefer to play a certain style. I find that it is easily achieved if one plays with more patience and wait for an opening before attacking. Patience is actually quite important in reducing unforced errors.
I agree that being in an attacking position often wins you more rallies... but I would rather have great defence than a great attack. Great defence means you can stay in every rally. Great attack means you can win occasionally when you have time to play an attacking shot. Regarding being caught flat footed: imagine I purposefully lift the shuttle a bit short, you hit your smash at me, and I whip a cross court drive that your partner cannot intercept. That is how you get caught flat footed. Or I could play a cross court block when you were expecting me to play straight. That would catch you and your partner out, both at an intermediate and an advanced (county) level - if the defence is good enough. Of course, if your attack gets better, and my defence stays the same, it becomes more difficult for me to hit such shots... but actually once your defence is really solid, it takes a very great increase in skill level to get through!
I remember Paul Stewart did an article a few years ago about styles of players. All player styles can be near equal in overall skill: Aggressive Attacker - all out attack with plenty of power and pace Aggressive Thinker - intelligent attack with plenty of skills Defender - likes slow pace and relies on consistency and rallying Counterattacker - likes to lift and counter hit in defence Pairs are actually combinations of these styles. The most effective combination is the one attacking thinker, paired with either an all out attacker or another attacking thinker. The thinkers are the ones who can hit all the shots, and deliberately use them to screw people up as much as possible A true all round player could play each style, but will probably have a favourite.
About the how-to-beat-them part: I've redirected your query to Yoda and says this hath what is he you to...get saying what i'm? works he it says. ahem..lol.. simply try confusing them or making them rotate a lot. It could expose their relative weaknesses easily. Or try focusing on one person constantly and attack the other once he's off guard. ps: Are you sure they are not so good at offense, or are good at it but are just not using them?
Thats like asking do you want lee yong dae or Yoo yeon sung. I also think LYD is the one who often cracks I would like an attacking player, the one who always try to attack. Rather than Those lifters and blockers
I have rarely seen anyone return a smash I executed properly in the form of a fast drive. Perhaps I haven't played at a high enough level, but I've been to a few clubs and practically nobody has returned my smash on a short lift (as in my feet don't go out the back) as a drive shot. The angle at which the shuttle travels means it's probably a foot or so under the net level after it reaches the opposing service line. Regarding the cross court block, I don't think it is a very good shot as the offensive position used during smashes means my partner is standing around the center T area. Regardless of which side the shuttle is blocked, it can be intercepted just as easily. Blocking is also a bad idea in doubles in my experience, as the block needs to be perfect to avoid being killed or hitting it into the net. I used to play offensive almost all the time but after watching the aged Lin Dan play, I hit many more neutral and building shots before attacking. I feel like this is the best way to win most badminton matches, as players like Ahsan/Setiawan did during their WC wins a while back. They were not bad at attacking, Ahsan especially, but they waited until they had an opportunity when their opponents were practically unable to defend at all.
I have this question with regards to service for mans doubles. When I look at tournamants videos, during mens doubles they usually do a low flick serve with the oponnent waiting on the front line. Why don't the server do a high flick serve now as the opponent is right on the front line....if high flick...it goes above the opponents head making him scrambling towards the back line to get the service. So why they don't this?
I would much rather play with a good attacker than good defender. Why? Have a bad day and the defensive pair will lose badly, it is very hard to play your way into defence, you can't tell the opposition to hit less hard and you will be blown off the court before you have even got started. A bad day attacking and you are in control, you can ease off for the first end and play your way into the game. Plus looking at higher level matches it is comparatively rare to see lots of defensive winners in any discipline. If you can use soft pushes, drives, drops, punch clears and smashes (all attacking shots) you can shut out the defensive pair and tire them out. Also personally I will try not to lift a smash back and try and drive and block the shuttle back instead. I find that in the UK it is relatively common to come across players with massive smashes and (comparatively) little else, there's usually at least one per local league team. The constant lift approach is therefore tactically naive, you are playing into their biggest strength! In fact I quite like playing with huge hitters like that as I can move around and set things up for them, it gives a good, blindingly obvious tactical aim to every rally which is difficult to counter.
On intermediate doubles intelligent Allrounder are the best! On this level all players have problems and allrounder can take advantage of this. Overall I would say that it is an individual thing. For example, you need a very good mindset against defensive players.
