3x21 rally vs. 3x15 service vs. 3x15 rally scoring system

Now, you have to figure out the other two.

 

I do not think BWF buys shuttles from the sponsor/s..These are supplied buy the sponsor to BWF as part of sponsorship... So I think you are confusing BWFs budget with the sponsor company budget

/Twobeer

 

u likely be right. I had previous thot in these cases yonex sponsorship mean in term of money.

 

Who do i think the other 2 voters are??..

..i'm thinking they are Mr. T's baddy friends..

 

what?? are they crazy ?
Think about it If you r late home and it is the AE final between LD and LCW and you miss ten mins then you will miss the first set and abit
Also what levels of fitness would you need for about 15 mins work
What other sport to you know lasts 15 mins??
I am sure they will listen to a well respected site like this

 

to be honest just leave it as it is now. I will admit the old scoring system took forever with the length of some of the close matches and even the regular ones. But this one is a good moderate time and fast and exciting! Leave it as it is.

 

Badminton will never stop evolving

.
bradmyster ... Badminton will never stop evolving.

At Badminton Central, just search threads under 'NSS', and you will find threads that we have been discussing when our Old Scoring System (OSS) was changed to the New Scoring System (NSS).
.

 

Specially the younger ones - and according to the ones I spoke to, 21x3 is easier and less demanding physically.

 

I'm 16 but still like the OSS better. Age is of no matter! Maybe I'm just mentally old. Mother says I was born in the wrong era. I listen to the *** Pistols and Beatles. I like CDs better than MP3s and I love 3x 15 over 3x 21 any day.

 

i find that the OSS is the most satisifying of the 3. In the NSS, i find all players do is smash constantly to win the points faster, making the game seem mechanical.

 

I only play with 3x15 server scoring system, as also the people I play with. I am not in the age for competitions, so I don't have to care about the scoring system. I play the system that I find most satisfying for myself.

 

2009 Spanish Open Finals on Sunday 24-May-2009: Duration of matches

.
A 3x21 rally point scoring system tournament just completed today, Sunday 24-May-2009

2009 Spanish Open: The order of play and match duration (from tournamentsoftware.com)

Starting at 10:00 am WD
Line Damkjær Kruse /Mie Schjøtt-Kristensen [2][DEN] - [IND] Aparna Balan / Shruti Kurian
21-14, 17-21, 21-15 in 50 mins

Followed by WS
Sayali Gokhale[IND] - [BEL] Lianne Tan
21-9, 21-18 in 23 mins

Followed by MS
Hans-Kristian Vittinghus [5][DEN] - [IND] Kashyap Parupalli [2]
21-10, 21-16 in 30 mins

Followed by XD
Robin Middleton / Mariana Agathangelou[ENG] - [IND] Arun Vishnu / Aparna Balan
21-16, 21-15 in 27 mins

Followed by MD
Rasmus Bonde / Mikkel Delbo Larsen [3][DEN] - [ENG] Dean George /Chris Langridge
26-24, 23-21 in 54 mins
.

 

imagine the time it would have taken for the Ws match it it was 3 x 15

Also today I was bored and looked up the badminton section of the guoness book of records 2005 as it is quite old it has the old scoring system was still in place
I looked up the shortest match and the longest match

The shortest was: WS ra kyung-min (KOR) bt julia Mann (ENG) 11-2 11-1 in 6 minutes in the über cup hong kong 19 may 1996

The longest was: MS Peter rasmussen (DEN) bt Sun Jun (CHN) 16-17 18-13 15-10 in 2hrs 4mins in the world badminton championships singles finals 1st of June 1997 in Glasgow

 

3x21 rally point scoring system shortest record match score played: 21-0, 21-0

.
The shortest match duration: 11-2, 11-1 in 6 minutes. That's interesting.

However, the shortest record match score (with the 3x21 rally point scoring system) that I remember was 21-0, 21-0. But that match took 10 minutes. It was a WD match on Day 3 at the 2008 Badminton Asia Championships:

Shinta Mulia Sari / Lei Yao[SIN] defeated [TKM] Valeriya Efremova /Violetta Shtyrova 21-0, 21-0
.

 

That match must have been a killer!

2 hours!

Wow - I'm starting to think that the old 15 point scoring system was better.

 

I know I think that the 3 x 21 is the best although the old system is quite good because it proves that you have to hve a lot of stamina and it proves that in 1997 peter rasmussen was a worthy winner however that system is too long as it was proved and 3x 15 proposed system would be too short so 3x 21 is just right

 

One of my clubs plays oss and other new, i prefer the oss but as a club member i think its fairer with the new as games turn around quicker and people who are not so good don't normally get whitewashed (which would be pretty disheartening).

Also if numbers are low and your game finishes quickly you can be sitting around for ages waiting for another game to finish.

If i was too book a court privately then definitely oss.

 

I played a tournament last saturday with 3x21 there was six courts however quite alot of entrys and I played my first game at 09:15 and didn't play my next game until 12:30 imagine with the OSS points system

 

3x21 RPS (NSS) vs 3x15 Service (OSS) -- A direct comparison

.
Hi coachgary,

Yes, there have been some analysis done before.
Check out this kanive 's post (Post#307 from this thread)

====== * ====== * ====== start post ====== * ====== * ======

I came across a complete video of the recent 2006 Commonwealth Games bronze medal match between Chetan Anand and Aamir Ghaffar, which was played using the rally21 system. Chetan won the match 21-17, 18-21, 21-13. Because I had the full record of who served at what stage, I decided to see what the scores would have been like if they had played the Right Way[TM].

Of course, the way people play changes according to the game situation. How you play at the beginning of a game is different from how you play at the end. You can be far more forgiving of errors at 4-all than at 14-12. But nevertheless, I think the comparison is instructive.

Let's get the obvious point out of the way first -- Chetan would have won, regardless. But _how_ he would have won would be very different. I am appending the full record below, but some highlights:

1. Chetan "won" the 3-setter 11-7, 8-10, 10-3
(editorial comment -- each of them only half a game! both players had a chance to come back and win the games they lost, even the last one)

2. If we ignored the end of game and continued to keep score as though the game ended only at 15, then Chetan won "game 1" at 15-10 midway through the actual game 2. At the end of the actual game 2, Aamir was up 7-4, and extended his "lead" to 10-5 early in game 3, but Chetan fought back and when the match ended he was up 14-10.
(so essentially the rally21 system took a comfortable 2-setter and converted it to a 3-setter. How will it deal with a true 3-setter? I leave that as an exercise for the reader.)

3. The match ended on Aamir's serve.
(another editorial comment. UGH.)

4. the commentators felt each game was essentially in the bag as soon as one player pulled out to a lead of about 4. This happened at 16-12 (9-5), 13-17 (5-8), and 14-10 (6-3) in each of the games. Far too soon to write off the opponent, I would think. Especially in game 2, when Chetan was just beginning to make a charge that he would sustain through game 3 and win in a canter.

And here is the full record of the match. The * represents server:

Bronze medal playoff, Commonwealth Games 2006, Melbourne
Chetan Anand – Aamir Ghaffar

Game 1
rally regular
0-0 *0-0
1-0 *1-0
1-1 1-0*
2-1 *1-0
2-2 1-0*
2-3 1-1*
2-4 1-2*
3-4 *1-2
4-4 *2-2
4-5 2-2*
4-6 2-3*
5-6 *2-3
6-6 *3-3
6-7 3-3*
6-8 3-4*
7-8 *3-4
7-9 3-4*
8-9 *3-4
9-9 *4-4
9-10 4-4*
9-11 4-5*
10-11 *4-5
11-11 *5-5
12-11 *6-5
13-11 *7-5
13-12 7-5*
14-12 *7-5
15-12 *8-5
16-12 *9-5
16-13 9-5*
17-13 *9-5
18-13 *10-5
18-14 10-5*
19-14 *10-5
19-15 10-5*
19-16 10-6*
19-17 10-7*
20-17 *10-7
21-17 *11-7

Game 2
0-0 *0-0
0-1 0-0*
1-1 *0-0
1-2 0-0*
2-2 *0-0
2-3 0-0*
2-4 0-1*
2-5 0-2*
3-5 *0-2
3-6 0-2*
4-6 *0-2
4-7 0-2*
4-8 0-3*
5-8 *0-3
6-8 *1-3
7-8 *2-3
8-8 *3-3
8-9 3-3*
9-9 *3-3
9-10 3-3*
10-10 *3-3
11-10 *4-3
11-11 4-3*
11-12 4-4*
11-13 4-5*
12-13 *4-5
13-13 *5-5
13-14 5-5*
13-15 5-6*
13-16 5-7*
13-17 5-8*
13-18 5-9*
14-18 *5-9
15-18 *6-9
16-18 *7-9
16-19 7-9*
17-19 *7-9
18-19 *8-9
18-20 8-9*
18-21 8-10*

Game 3
0-0 0-0*
0-1 0-1*
1-1 *0-1
2-1 *1-1
2-2 1-1*
2-3 1-2*
2-4 1-3*
3-4 *1-3
3-5 1-3*
4-5 *1-3
5-5 *2-3
6-5 *3-3
7-5 *4-3
7-6 4-3*
8-6 *4-3
8-7 4-3*
9-7 *4-3
9-8 4-3*
10-8 *4-3
11-8 *5-3
11-9 5-3*
12-9 *5-3
12-10 5-3*
13-10 *5-3
14-10 *6-3
15-10 *7-3
16-10 *8-3
17-10 *9-3
17-11 9-3*
18-11 *9-3
18-12 9-3*
19-12 *9-3
20-12 *10-3
20-13 10-3*
21-13 *10-3

====== * ====== * ====== end post ====== * ====== * ======
.