I have played 2 tournaments with the "old" 15x3 system and then 1 tournament with the "new" 21x3 rally point system...quite frankly I think I did better with the new system than the old one. The new one places more emphisis on consistancy and skill I find.
no not that...it's easy to cheat on the point. since u have to keep track a lot of numbers and it's not guessable from the service change. at least I'm speaking about club level with no referee and on honor system i.e. call your own So about this scoring system, should we not post in the pro player system. but how strong a boycott will be? like the NHL? does pro badminton players have a union that can organized this?
smash_master, thx for the reply...well, since you mentioned you feel the "new" scoring system "places more emphasis on consistancy and skill", does that mean, with the "old" scoring system it puts less emphasis on those 2 factors??..how abt the pace of the game??..
Whilst it is heartening to read the passion and argument presented in this thread by fellow members that are against the new 21 points rally system, we also need to look at the other side of the coin, i.e. from the organizer's point of view. In this regard, I think it is useful if I would translate the last 2 paragraphs of the original article posted by CXYTDN: *** Badminton, which has a history of over hundred years, has grown significantly since it became an official Olympics sports 14 years ago. However, the same old problems of lacking participating countries and long tournament duration are still persisting and hinder any sustainable longterm development of the sport. This may lead to a potential risk that badminton may be excluded from future Olympic games. To encourage more countries to participate in and regional development of the sport, as well as reducing tournament duration, attracting more spectators, opening new markets and benefit TV broadcasting; the IBF had decided last year to adopt the new best-of-three 21-points rally system from February 2006, for a trial period of 3 months. In these 3 months, although not every team has familiarised themselves with the new scoring system, it (the new scoring system) does reveal its characteristics of "high chance of upset" and in "helping the weaker team and restrint on the stronger team" in the current Uber and Thomas Cup tournament. For example, Korea has been excluded from the last 4 in the Uber Cup, replaced by German and Chinese Taipei for the first time; not to mention Holland making her historical debut in the final. *** So it is of no secret from IBF that they made their decision purely from a commercial angle. Putting aside our preference of 3x15 or 3x21, we cannot deny the fact that in order to attract big money and more live TV coverage on this game, those factors mentioned by IBF (which I highlighted in red) are keys. We cannot on one hand wanted the sports to gain more and wider recongnition and popular, but on the other ignore the commercial appealing factors that it has on the potential sponsor. In the old days, I recalled a major competition like TC or AE finals could last more than 5 hours. In the modern era when air times are at such a premium, this must be a nightmare for any organiser to sell the broadcasting right and say that it will last somewhere between 2 hours to 6 hours. It is just quite impossible. With 3x21, the duration is much more predictable. I agreed with what most of you who said that in 3x21, once you are behind by 5-6 points, it is quite difficult to come back and that take away the element of suspence and thrill of seeing a great come-from-behind victory. But if, in any way, the old scoring system is starting threatening the survival of our beloved sport in this commercial world, should we not give and take a little? For better or for worse, other sports are changing too. The other "serve-to-win-point" sport, i.e. Volleyball, has also gone into rally point few years ago. Badminton cannot simply just lag behind. One thing we all agree is that IBF could have done this in a better and less high-handed way by publicly put forward the challenges they are facing (with facts and figures) as well as the pros and cons of both systems, so that the badminton public (both the competitive and casual players and supporters) could digest this better. Anyway, the commerical impact and changes are not applicable to casual non-competitive players like many of us here - so there is no stopping us to continue to use the 3x15 systems in our weekly sessions as long as we like. Cheers
Well when you look at it since a point is gained every time a rally ends and since either side can get it you have to make sure that you win it. This does make the consistancy needed more, you have to keep the rally alive longer and force them into make a mistake or to win the rally yourself. This does not mean you cannot use power though. The pace of the game well it doesnt really change just depends on how confident you are in your skill to pull out the big shots. With the older scoring system there is still the same amount of consistancy ad skill needed but the pressure is not as great I feel. Oh well thats just my 2 cents.
Very difficult indeed! In response to your suggestions: 1. Probably the most effective if you are ambitious enough to first take control of your country's Badminton Assn and then with like-minded comrades in the other member countries capture the IBF Council! 2. Yes it is very unreasonable to ask the pros to boycott as it is their livelihood. Furthermore, not every pro hate the new system, some even like it. 3. To have some effect petitions should come from IBF member countries. 4. To obtain boycotts from spectators and viewers is even more difficult as badminton watching is a form of entertainment to them and the intense spectacle is what they want on TV. Too long rallies and matches lasting over an hour or two may make it boring for the viewer/spectator. The new system enables the newcomer understand the scoring better, so it seems. 5. Starting a new league or creating a new organization to rival IBF takes a lot of time, money and resources. Who will want to lead? There were two rival world badminton organizations before but for the good of the game they decided to merge. 6. One reason for the new system appears to be at the request of sponsors to have matches lasting shorter instead of longer so that they could advertise their goods and services through TV commercials. 7. Badminton is our game, for better or for worse. We find joy, entertainment, good exercise, social interaction, etc, in playing the game. Would not be a good idea to stop playing unless you have a better option to spend your time. Amongst our own circle of badminton friends, if we really wanted to remain as before, we can still play the 3x15 system. 8. As for myself, I will continue to play whatever system that is required for that particular occasion.
I agree with you. In the recent Thomas Cup competition, just try to recollect/replay those images, the intensity of the rallies, the mounting attacks and risk taking, the sliced angled shots, subtle net plays and the element of suspense/excitement of the following matches: 1. Lin Dan versus Peter Gade 2. Chan Chong Ming/KKKk versus Jens Eriksen/Martin Lungaard (If I've not forgotten one game went to 29-27, almost the limit of 30 points allowed!) I suppose the players have to go all out to win at the very start and when they are the first to reach 17 points, they need to bring up their attacks a notch higher. In the words of Lin Dan, "I tried to increase the speed of my shuttle at the last stage of each game". Their rivals will try to close ithe gap whenever possible, but even the very experienced Danish World No. 1 doubles pair completely lost their concentration in the rubber game to allow the young Malaysians to demolish them. The bubble really burst for the the Danes. Who would have imagined that Malaysia lost all its three singles matches and Denmark, all two of their doubles? Exciting stuff!
Some of Linus' post snipped for brevity.. Linus, thanks for your extended explanation of the article. Actually there's another thread in the Thomas & Uber Cup forum which touched on this subject also..I just want to make some similar comments to your post, if you don't mind.. yes, the former is possible. However, as for the latter, i doubt it will happen. Sure, it's true 3 of the 4 Semifinalists, mentioned above, were surprised teams. Their surprised appearances as Semifinalist *could be* related to the new scoring system change. However, at the end, it was no different as China won 3-0 to defend their Cup. As for the Thomas Cup, 4 of the top countries made the Semifinals, as there were no surprises. But at the end China again was able to defend their Cup. Don't tell Mr. Gunalan about how long 2 of the UBER Cup Semifinals matches took place..Maybe this will only happen in team events, not so much in individual events, but IMO, i highly doubt the scoring system change will change much of the time duration. Do you think or feel, using the old scoring system was really a "threat" for the survival of badminton in the commercial world??.. Sure, other sports have "changed" and "evolved" also. But the game of badminton is still what it is. Non-knowledgeable people will still not change their mindset of the game of Badminton. I just feel changing the scoring system again, for the sake of gaining commercialization, wasn't going to be the big "clincher".. Yes, agree and definitely shouldn't have to sacrifice the scoring system. Didn't they attempt the same thing about 4 yrs. ago??.. hmm, so what does this mean??..Does this mean, there's now 2-ways to play/score the game?? And that both scoring systems(old and new) are still valid no matter what??..If so, will badminton become the 1st and only sport in the world to have 2 valid and legit scoring systems??..And if this new scoring system is accepted and used for quite sometime and then IBF decides to make another scoring change, will badminton have 3 types of valid and legit scoring systems??..
hmm, i see...so basically in comparing between the 2 scoring systems, the only difference is, there is more pressure playing with the new scoring system??..how about in terms of freely utilizing and performing your skills and shot selections in trying to get the points, knowing one needs to make less self-error(s)??..
Replying to CTJCAD: To be honest, yes I do. It is a fact that for each Olympic there is a continous drive to limit the number of sports to cut cost. Obviously the sports that get included will be the ones that are highly popular and could get the large majority support from the committee members. Not to mention the huge influence some of the major sponsors would have on the decision. If badminton is to only be enjoyed by only with a selected group of countries, then yes it will risk being voted out. So from this angle, the appearance of German, Holland and Chinese Taipei in the Uber Cup last 4 is a good sign. Yes at the end China won hands down as we have expected, but dont you think just being there, winning Silver and Bronze in a major event like Uber Cup give these countries something to cheer about and indeed some hope for the younger shuttlers back home? I think the result is positive in that way - it give them hope, probably not winning the gold but give the traditional strong teams a good run for their money. Looking at the major events, the price money is monkey compare to other sports. Name me a major global reconisable corporate name (besides Yonex) that winning to sponsor a major 5 or 6 stars events? Hardly any. What sustain some of the badminton powerhouses to continue badminton development is the chance to bring national glory in event like Olympic to put the nation name on a world map. I believe there is a fair amount of public money being pump into it relative to commercial sponsorship - in longer term, this may not be sustainable. I cannot imagine what would happen to the body of badminton in the likes of Indonesia, Malaysia (or dare I mention Singapore) if badminton is no longer a event in future Olympic. I am not saying 3x21 is good, but it does allow badminton to evolve in this commercial driven sports arena. It may even allows it to survive. Cheers
hmm, fair enough reply... well, we shall see what will be the public's as well as the sponsors' reactions after the World Championship(Spain) this coming September(as that is the next "major event" which IBF will gage the new scoring system)..
Thanks! Yes let's see how this new system goes, and more importantly how IBF, after making the decision to go with this system, is going to sell this to the commercial world and get the long overdue recongnition that badminton is the next "beautiful game" that worth their support. Hopefully, it is a win-win situation, that the players and the supporters all benefit.
I don't know about other countries, but in the UK there is more air time available than the TV companies can fill. The main free to air broadcasters in the UK, BBC, ITV and C4 have multiple channels stuffed full of repeats of old shows, repeats of what was on earlier the same day, repeats of what was on earlier this week, repeats of what was on last week, repeats and more repeats. Repeats of the weather forecast, where they tell you what the weather was like yesterday.
The new system has not been a disaster, and I think it meets the objectives of closely predictable timing, and good excitment levels. As many people have said, this is not a surprise and not really bad news.
nope indeed, we already practise for like 4 months now with the new system, to get used to it..... though i have to admit serve only points are clearly better for me, as i tend to fight back from being far behind, and i am more of an endurance player , but it can go either way, i tend to let the opponent make mistakes (which now always gives me points)
Oh no!!! The new scoring system SUCKS :crying: Now they will be using it in our tournaments!!! :crying:
Yes, I fully concur. From what I've heard, it has brought badminton into a totally different light of less productivity. Although I respect everyone's opinions and the point for commercial aspects and to possibly save its position in the Olympics, it can hardly account for the thousands and millions of people who are dissatisfied with this change. It may be true that it is up to the public's leisure to play with a certain set of rules, official tournaments would involve these [official] 'laws', and many would find playing less enjoyable. The fact that the rules pertain more to the pros than it does us recreational players makes it difficult for some to understand the substantial strain it may put on participants who do not wish to deal with such a radical coversion. But, it is imperative that it is a matter of great importance to the public, even more so than the pros. Point being, if there is no public to support a sport, it will eventually die. And that may or may not be due to the fact that such changes discourage the international fan(atic) community, but it is certainly a pronouncable factor. As for the commercial viewing time and duration of games, I find that since badminton is more so a year-round sport, rather than a seasonal sport, it is harder to find open slots of time, as other more popular(well known) sports would be of higher priority. Besides this, it is up to the IBF to find broadcasting through more convenient means, so that the public does not have to scour for a channel in which to view its media. More air time outside of the Olympics should be brought to more local stations in individual countries. This may be a difficult task, but it is a better goal, than to try to promote a sport through changes unwanted by the majority. In any case, the change arising with all its controversy, would not matter to those who do not concern themselves with this sport, and therefore, would bring no substantial number of new supporters who'd care. Those who are loyal to the sport and enjoy it with their full capacity would most likely honor this change. But, it is also not to say that those who do not favor this sport BECAUSE of this change are not truly loyal or incompetent. It may just be that they do not want to deal with all the discrepency and poignant offense that it offers. Furthermore, the decision of commercial publicity over public and professional preference/familiarity is an aspect which is well biased.
Tsumaranai, you brought up a very interesting point...And IMO, it is a very "powerful" approach in promoting the sport...With this said, i was wondering, is it possible if IBF and ESPN/ESPN2 sign somekind of a contract(1-2 yr. is good) to televise live broadcast of IBF "bigger" events?ie. Thomas and Uber Cup, Sudirman Cup, Olympics and World Championships to begin with..Rather than thru broadband web..I mean why can't ESPN broadcast those events live or delayed??..Have it scheduled on ESPN for people to watch, even for 1-2 hrs...For example, i know CNBC did attempt it 2 yrs. ago in the Olympics and last yr's attempt by ESPN to broadcast the World Championship was a good start..Why not continue it further??..BTW, i don't know if anyone noticed, but i noticed in the recent Thomas & Uber Cup, i thought i saw Charmaine Reid doing interviews with players at the end of some matches like she did in last yr's WC, if not sorry, maybe i'm seeing things.. We all know badminton is already popular in Asia and some part of Europe, but why not have the game exposed more to the U.S. public??...Especially considering a way to popularize the game in the U.S...Imagine us fans living in the U.S./North or South American continent getting a cable broadcast of the Thomas & Uber Cup, rather than thru broadband web??...If for just for 1-2 hrs, let it be, the rating migh start slowly, but it's a start??..I mean, if they can broadcast live poker tournaments, why can't they broadcast badminton(which probably has much more following that poker)??..Isn't U.S. basically the commercial capital of the world and an oasis for badminton to become popular??..
To bad the USA media and sponsors are just not willing to take the step to advocate for badminton, and to put actually money in it (in the form of products and especially TV-shows/matches etc.).... though i hope to see a rise of that!. Though i think badminton looks easier when you see it on the television....but when i stand on the court all i do is wondering how can it look so easy but be so hard
