As someone who played virtually all of my tournament under the old scoring system, but has watched a fair amount of badminton under the new system, I definitely prefer the old system. As a player, particularly in doubles, the old system allowed you to work your way back into the match after a slow start. As a spectator, the old system usually provided for more drama because it was easier for the team that fell behind to catch up. Unless a match now gets tied at 20 all, it ends abruptly. Games tend to be shorter and less dramatic.
OSS was great I guess every game has a certain tempo and taste and OSS depicts the real tempo of badminton. Why are long badminton matches a problem to telecast on TV, I can't figure out? Tennis lasts for hours, so does football, and they are the most widely watched games around the world. I can only pray that some how I could see Lin Dan and Lee Chong Wei competing under OSS
I prefer to play under the OSS. If you make a few errors and they get a big lead, its very hard to make a comeback. The tournaments we play are to 30 rally score which is great and not too short. But in our social we still play the OSS as its more time on court and its good to have 2 serves in doubles!!
Hmm perhaps BWF can look to another alternative combining both the adantages of the OSS ( Old scoring system - people have to stop abbreivating for people that won't understand it ) and the NSS ( New scoring system ) to create a Scoring system which will enable both enough brakes for the players , enough time for adverts , to keep the audiences intent on watching , to make the games not last too long or too short. I want to start planning some type of scoring system . But now to sleep.
Interesting to know which system our international players prefer . There is a difference in what we, BCers, like: * A scoring system for us to play in our own private Badminton matches * A scoring system for us to watch at International Badminton matches It would be interesting for us to discover which one our international players prefer. .
I hate it to be honest The game end before you know it. So far just had 1 night session with this rule. first impression, This entirely take out stamina department Good for all out offensive game, however pretty much disaster for slow starter/need more time to warm up. The old 15 scoring system is really good however its not so good when playing casual game with alot of friends since the game last longer. 21 point system also good, shorter time thus we can rotate players faster. For me, I like the old 15 point scoring system but played to 30 points.
i like the scoring system 3x21 rally...i think it makes the game more exciting and it could also make people more consistant which in turn makes for longer more intense matches
I prefer the old system, but I'd like the new system too if it was changed to 21x5 for men and 21x3 for women, like grand slams in tennis. 21x3 is really too short, a match lasts 45 minutes at most...
15 x 5 rally point would be the best of all worlds. Brings endurance back into the mix while keeping the action intense. More TV breaks to sell ads. I think the 21 x 3 rally point results in too many short matches
^^Some things to ponder with that 15x5 scoring system..^^ - Chances for much longer matches, could last 1.5 hrs... (which BWF was trying to avoid in bringing up the 21x3 scoring system), if say a match goes the full distance (5 matches, a minimum total of 75 winning pts.), in comparison to the current 21x3 scoring system (3 matches, a minimum total of 63 winning pts). - Also, what will be the winning margin in the 15x5 system? 1 pt or 2 pts, should the score reach 14-14? If by 2 pts, what is the max. pt allowed in a game? In the current 21x3 scoring system: - The interval pt for TV breaks for ads is @ 11 pts. - If a match goes the full distance (3 games), there will be at least 5 TV breaks for ads. If they use a 15x5 scoring system and not allow any interval break, then there will be 4 TV breaks for ads (in between games). If they use an interval break in each game, the chances for more TV breaks for ads would occur. But @ what pt should the interval be given? At 7 pts? or at 8 pts? What if there is no interval in each game and the play keeps going til 15 pts?
Deuce at 14-14, first 2 ahead or play to 20. Interval at 8 pts. The idea is to provide revenue opportunity for TV
^^Hmm..^^ - If 20 pts is the max. how will the length of the match affect the perception of the sport, should a match go the full 5 games?..It's back to BWF's initial concern of the OSS, prior of the NSS. - Revenue from TV break ads will be there. Interval @ 8 pt is not too short?
My perception is the game is too short at the moment. However, changing it to 15 x 5 won't make it too much longer. A straight games win in 21 x 3 = 42 points to win (no deuce) A straight games win in 15 x 5 = 45 points to in (no deuce), yet allows a couple of extra commercial breaks When going the full distance, 21 x 3 = 63 points to win 15 x 5 = 75 points to win + 4 extra commercial breaks. A good trade off I say, with maybe an additional 10-15 mins playing time. Tennis matches go can on for 3-4 hours. I don't see the sponsors complaining. Look at the interval breaks in tennis - every 8 points won.
Hmm.. - I understand. Different folks have different perception on the length of the game. Personally, i could care less, although the current system also makes a few matches a bit too long. - No question abt the commercial breaks opportunity w/ the 15x5 system. But then, the time length of the matches...Unfortunately BWF is in control... - Tennis is different as they have a lot of spectators all over the world, esp. in western countries. Badminton, however, is concentrated more in Asian countries. Thus not as wide a market as tennis. Yes, tennis is a longer game, thus the thinking of more breaks are necessary so as to not make the viewers "bored" (i know i fell asleep a lot of times just watching tennis). Maybe the breaks are the ones eating up the time??.. Badminton, at max is only 1-1.5 hrs long, incl. breaks. So you mind badminton matches to go 2-3 hrs just like tennis? That way we can have more TV breaks for ads.
Honestly, with a 15 x 5 system, matches with breaks will probably go 1.5 hours max. And this is singles. Doubles will probably be shorter. I never want badminton to go the length of tennis matches. I rarely survive a full tennis match without getting bored.
Make it tough! A lot of non-badminton players that I know think that badminton is an easy game- a poor mans' tennis. We need to make badminton players crawl off the court dripping with sweat! 15x3 OSS should be a minimum in any form of the game, but the top international events should be 21x3 OSS or 21x5 NSS. Some have said the players (e.g LD, LCW) would be too tired towards the end of the match, but this makes the game physical again, and will make the top players work harder, else they risk losing to a fitter but less talented player.
