A rally starts from the first stroke of the racket, the Service Hi taneepak, Agree with you here... If we wanted more comebacks, then we should follow what you have quoted above, that is by "changing the OSS to allow the server to have an additional serve after having lost the rally from the first serve". In Tennis, some are already thinking of disallowing a server to have a second Service if his/her first Service is a fault. This might be implemented in years to come. A true comeback should be a string of rallies won. And a rally starts from the first stroke of the racket, which is the Service. Cheers... chris@ccc
This post made me laugh... totally needless and has hidden implications which would just lead to possible barb throwing.. Taneepak.. naughty, naughty.. LOL!!
Do a Google search on "nature neuroscience journal on liberal minds bias". It provides an interesting read although some may think it is all a load of "bull....".
Do you really think 3x21 rally based system is a new idea? Many will tell you that it is not. No one is disagree that the system enhances certain elements of badminton game that is why it has been frequently used in match practices in the past. Many have expressed the system has take away the core elements of badminton game. For me, it is critical part of the debate and the resaon why many still vote for 3X15! Who is more open minded?
However you put it, there was once an OSS system which was replaced by a NSS system, a CHANGE. If we still have the OSS, that would mean OSS - OSS (still in use) = NO CHANGE. Nothing to do with being more open minded. Can you enlighten us with your claim that the NSS was tried out in Open Championships before? I cannot recall, except for the 21 point OSS system.
Heh actually I'm a conservative person, but I welcome the NSS if it helps promote badminton better... so I have no idea if I'm smarter or not I have mentioned before that perhaps the reason why ppl don't like this is because the service point system seemed unique to badminton, but of course other sports used this kind of system as well so I stand corrected. Anyway, I would like the OSS mainly because I wanna see 2 champions duke it out. But if the NSS is to stay, like it would appear to be, I won't mind it to be BO5 instead... I would like long matches Look at Tennis, each game requires 4 points to win (15, 30, 40, win). 6 games to win a set so 24 points in a game. Men's singles finals are BO5. But we have to take into account that badminton is faster as in lesser rest intervals and other things that Tennis has like fault service and deuce, so basically tennis only appears to be longer on TV because of these things. Both scoring systems are basically the same except badminton is BO3. Why not BO3 for all matches except the finals?
Is BO5 good for the NSS ??? Hi jcr2001, Hehehe... You have to take into account that Badminton is much faster than Tennis. Badminton is like sprinting, while Tennis is like jogging. In Badminton, when 2 Professional Singles opponents are of equal skill, each of their game takes about 20 minutes. And if they go to 5 games, are you asking them to sprint for 100 minutes. It could be too tough for them. Cheers... chris@ccc
Yes, I actually thought that maybe badminton by nature is a more intensive sport so BO3 is fine. But wouldn't it be nicer if it had BO5? You have to pace yourself for the finals. Or maybe give them a 2 day break or something...
One question - Are you allowed to discard your previous vote and change into a new vote in this poll? My opinion about the OSS and NSS - I played a lot of table tennis. I have been playing since I was third grade. The scoring system then was 21x3 with 5 services each. I've learned to strategize with this scoring system. I could, when I was already in grade 5 play a game with 19-5, with my opponent winning and still win over him. I liked the adrenalin rush when I was behind. I always wanted my opponent to give his best and feel that he IS giving his best. And, I'd give my best shots to win the games. This meant no mistakes whatsoever - service, rallies, winning drives, chops, etc. Real focus, even when I was just in my 5th grade. Then, lately, it was changed to 11x3, 11x5, 11x7. I've grown old already when this was changed. I've noticed that I couldn't pace myself anymore and get the adrenalin rush when I wanted it. I started to play like it was always the ending part of the game. All aggression, all attack. Each point really mattered. Focus, from beginning to end. Still, no mistakes. Sometimes I win. Many times I lose. I missed the 21x3. However, I still play table tennis, even with the 11x3, 11,5, 11x7 scoring system. Then came badminton into my life. I used to queue just to play. It took a long time before we could play. And when it's time to play, the better players who have played already could not play right away with us. They needed time to recover. And if we were first to play, we also could not play with the others right away. We also needed time to recover. I wished for the rally-point system like table tennis. We tried it. It didn't go like the NSS, but we tried the rally with 2 services each. Many did not like it because we finished the games easily. They were still looking for the blood, sweat and tears that the OSS usually demanded from us when we played. And so, we went back to OSS and shortened it to 11 points, so that many in queue will have the chance to play with those who played first. Many were happy with this. I also played in a club. When there were few players in queue, we played OSS because it really takes a long time to finish. But, in the evenings, when there were many players, the NSS is followed as a house rule. Everybody is happy because they get to play, and we could wait for only a short time in order to play next. However, I've noticed lately, that many players are preferring to play the NSS over the OSS even if there are few players in queue. Some still want to play OSS. I guess their preferrence is due to the caliber of the players that they are going to play with. If the caliber is class A, OSS. If lower, NSS. Many class A players would want their games to last longer because they only get to play against each other very rarely. If the class A players play with lower caliber players, they usually do not give their best. It's easy for them to win. Mistakes of the lower caliber players come into play - both for OSS and NSS. But, it takes a shorter time in NSS. They are still polite and courteous. Many class b and lower prefer NSS. As for me, my wish came true. Since I am already used to playing the 21 points in a game because of my table tennis, now - no mistakes, correct services, good offensive clears, well placed soft and hard smashes, good positioning and footwork, etc. - I often get the adrenalin rush when I want to win a 17-10 game. Sometimes I win. Many times I lose. But what the heck. It's still adrenalin. It's fun.
May I suggest we revisit the original thread "Lets vote for the New or Old point system". It will give us a more balanced appreciation of how humans, at least most of them, don't like change. In the beginning the old IBF was put to the sword. Now (renamed BWF) I think it has shown real leadership in bringing the game to a very high new level never seen before. Lesson in perspective over time?
"Lets vote for New or Old point system" original thread And the "Lets vote for New or Old point system" original thread is located at: http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=27000 There, the NSS started almost with 0% vote, but it ended at 20% on 13-January-2007. Then, kwun started this second poll. In this one, the NSS started with around 20% vote, and it is now reaching 46% as at today, 6-October-2007. Perhaps more players have now experienced playing the NSS. *
well for me... as I just started playing badminton with the new system... and i'm kinda used to the old scoring system 'coz I used to play volleyball (they are similar but we call it a side out in volleyball).I like the new system better. well, the only thing constant in this world is change.
NSS should only be for Internationals, at club and league level, players do not have the skill levels to keep the ralleys flowing, games have to be played with safety in mind and do not encourage a more adventureous playing style. I have stopped playing Vets. County matches as I'm not prepaired to travel for 3hrs. to play in games lasting on average 7mins.
NNS is only about money The NNS is all to do with money The only reason there is a new scoring system is because after 11 points have been played they can have a commercial break. It splits the game up nicely for the TV people to estimate how long a game will last, so it doesn't bugger up their scedule and they can tell their advertising clients how many ads they can have in that amount of time. So instead of the game running on, the advertisers of others programmes get their ads in on time. Sad for the game,
To arrive at the same amount of time spent on court to be played for each player Hey JimFerguson, Welcoming your first post@Badminton Central IMHO, these are the estimated times required for a game under NSS and OSS. NSS(15-20 mins) : OSS(20-30 mins) for higher skill levels. NSS(10-15 mins) : OSS(15-25 mins) for medium skill levels. NSS(5-10 mins) : OSS(10-20 mins) for lower skill levels. It is unfortunate that some organisers of social/league events do not take these estimated times into consideration. For Vets County matches, it should be suggested to the organisers that there should be doubled the number of NSS games for each player... to arrive at the same amount of time spent on court to be played for each player. Cheers... chris@ccc
I think by "higher skill levels" you mean lower score difference (and of course for the other "skill levels")? A very close game between two low skilled players can last long...
The question to ask : Is badminton getting healthier after NSS? No system is perfect and we are talking about the survival of this sports in Olympic so like it or not, NSS will and has to stay. Imagine if we are still using OSS in Super Series, any rubber sets will put the players in huge disadvantage or even potential injury in the next round. Wong Choon Hann, Taufik Hidayat, Chen Hong, Peter Gade, Kenneth Jonassen, ... would have to retire already! Yes, NSS lose certain charm like long rally and record breaking playing time but this can be replaced by more aggressive plays. Yes, I still miss the classic rally between Rashid Sidek vs Ardi Winarata in Thomas Cup 1992 Final, but I also treasure the duel between Lee Chong Wei vs Lin Dan/Taufik Hidayat in Japan Open 2007. The only casualty of NSS is MD which can be fixed easily by increasing to 25 point, IMHO. We live in a fast pace society, OSS needs to change like many other sports have already done.
Actually badminton is fortunate to be included in the Olympics. The criteria for any sport or game to qualify for inclusion in the Olympics is that the sport or game must have rules and a scoring system with a governing body plus that it must be a popular sport or game in at least 75 countires for men's events and 40 countries for women's events. I don't think badminton is anywhere near there and is definitely not popular in 75 countries that have their own governing bodies. Maybe the BWF should focus more in countries in Africa, S. America, M. East, E. Europe, and the Pacific islands, instead of being 'controlled' by the major badminton powers.
