Btw, when you get to setting in table tennis, i.e. deuce you must win 2 clear points to win the game and each player can only serve once. Table tennis is the ultimate racquet/bat sports in pressure points. They also have pressure point-reducer called time-out. If only badminton were to follow.
You have very good points here. In-house training can help the development for the mental aspect. It depends how close the training is done to simulate the real situations, and I agree the real test is during the competitions. You mentioned the Malaysian players problems - but looking at Denmark, whose situation may be similar to Malaysia, produced great players - Hoyer-Larsen, Olympic gold medalist - and results. Maybe improving the infrastructure (training facilities, doctors, trainers/coaches, etc) and players discipline could be help? Top players are always expected to win, so they are always pressured to bring the trophies back home. The stress is there, and the players are taught to handle the pressure - some do better than others. Personally I don't think the 21-point will be more stressful to the players. The players are trained to win and will handle the games accordingly. I have not checked, but I believe the average number of rallies is higher for the 21-point games - which I assume is the players' adopted strategy for this format. Winning or losing in 15-point or 21-point format does not make any difference to the players. You also have a very good point about the reaction during adverse situations during the 21-point system - that's why I prefer the 15-point system which may give the struggling party a bit more chance to find the right answer to the challenge, which may make the match more interesting. If time was the factor behind the reasoning of changing the scoring format, I wonder if imposing a time limit for the matches was considered. I would have preferred to keep the scoring format, but stipulate a time (60 mins?) for the match - similar to football which gives 90 mins for the teams to decide the game. Just my thoughts.
I'm still astonished by how much discussion the new scoring system generates. It took me one clubnight to get used to it. Apart from that initial adjustment, I have barely noticed any difference. You still win games one rally at a time. The only annoying thing is that some clubs still play the old system, which means you have to keep switching from one to the other. I don't care what system we use (within reason -- no games to 500 points, for example), but I would like to settle on one. I've read comments that the new system reduces aggressive play, and in particular sucks the blood out of men's and mixed doubles. Maybe we're watching different matches, or maybe I'm just too much a pleb to see the difference. It looks like the same old badminton to me. I find it surprising how attached people become to a scoring system. It's just a scoring system; the real game happens in the rallies. The worst thing you could possibly do would be to develop a hang-up over the new system (then you would have created a psychological disadvantage for yourself).
One of the reasons why I vote for the NSS . Spot on ... Gollum, Yes, it's surprising that people become attached to their scoring systems that we have to play different scoring systems used at different clubs. But on the subject of which system is better for club play... I would have to say that I prefer to play the NSS. Why? There is a shorter period of time to wait for the next game. At a club using the OSS, I would play some 3-4 games in a session, having to rest for up to 30 minutes between games. And after a 30-minutes break, I would be cooled down completely. Therefore, I need to warm up again to play my next game. However, at a club using the NSS, I would play some 6-8 games, having to rest for up to 15 minutes between games. A 15-minutes break would not cool me down completely. Therefore I could comfortably play my next game without having to restart warming up again. But the total time that I spent on court playing is still the same. I find the NSS allows me to continue playing without the 'Cold Start', which we know is not good for us. This is one of the reasons why I vote for the NSS. .
That's a good point. When I play at clubs using the old system, it's much the same most of the time. But occasionally a game goes on for absolutely bloody ages, as the serve passes back and forth with no points scored. This tends to happen when the players have very poor serves. This doesn't happen with the new system -- at least, not to the same extent; the new system has a hard limit of 59 rallies in a game.
If not mistaken.. ...(from someone who've watched the many intense, exciting, hands-over-your-eyes, nerve-wrecking Federer vs. Nadal's matches) tennis uses a similar concept of scoring system in its tiebreak scoring system. Basically a player will be given 2 serves each, with each player taking turns, regardless of who leads/trails. (someone more familiar with tennis' rules could elaborate more??).. Bringing in the same type of scoring concept to badminton??..Sure, why not, we're all for it.....And i'm sure another round of hotly debated discussion would ensue....
I do not find any displeasure playing with other scoring systems . ctjcad ... You have caused to remember on what I have posted here before (refer to Post#142). I have stated that many of my table tennis, tennis and volleyball friends have requested me to play Badminton with them with using their scoring systems (because they are more familiar with them). And while I played with them with those scoring systems, I still do not find any displeasure. You should try it. The funny one is Tennis ... 15, 30, 40, deuce, advantage server, etc... .
And even you could not resist commenting! Were you playing singles or doubles with the 21-point system?
almost like the feather versus nylon shuttle debate Of course some adjustment to the game is required but since both side are equally advantaged or disadvantaged, it still come down to player's overall skills that determine the winner.
Time to make the scoring system universal??.. (with all this discussion about how the current badminton NSS evolved from squash & table-tennis' scoring systems) ..how about if we "universalized" the scoring system esp. for squash, table tennis and badminton (and maybe even tennis). Use 1 scoring system for all 3(4) sports & be done with it. Thus eliminating all the guesswork, discomfort and confusion amongst all participants. Heck, we might even have some baddy converts from those mentioned non-baddy sports.
Serves in table tennis & tennis rewards the server with an offensive advantage. You can get points just from service in tennis ("Service Aces"). In TT, server dictates the initial spin/placement (2nd bounce) of the ball. Not uncommon in these 2 games to see most of the winning points going to the serving side. OTOH, badminton serves puts servers at a slight disadvantage due to the lower than waist+wrist requirement. While the server still dictates the placement, the server is placed in defense whether he serves low or flicks. The current service rule does in fact balances the game by giving the side that lost the last point that slight advantage.
In tennis and table tennis both sides have roughly the same number of serves irrespective of who is winning or losing or regardless of the margin of the score-so it is a very fair system. In badminton, if the server wins the toss and elects to serve and then continues to win every rally until 21-0, the winner would have served 21 times and the loser none. This is grossly unfair and a rather unfair playing field, and it would have less pressure points than tennis' or table tennis' equal number of serves for both sides. I am quite sure that a change to a fairer serve rule will be debated or even implemented or trialed sometime in the future. Doing so will make the game even more exciting.
I am not particularly excited about TT or Tennis. In the Singapore vs China TT OG(final) that happened to clash with LCW vs LD, I did not at any point switch away from badminton. Your suggestion is fairer only due to elimination of a variable and the said pressure point only arises from introducing changes in the game. This pressures both server & receiver. Your 21-0 match is boring anyway you change the serving system. IMHO, a balanced game is more exciting. A fair game of me vs. Lin Dan will be devastatingly boring. A much more exciting match if I play in a much smaller court (balancing). The current service rule creates more pressure on the winner of the point due to that the server is essentially defensive after the serve. This balances the game making it slightly easier for the receiver to get a point. The victory is then more convincing if you switch your perspective from raw counting (the total number of serves) to that the winner survived an "unequal" odd by serving more times. In a close match, the ratio of service is evenly split anyway. OTOH, if you are sure that the change is inevitable, this entire debate is pointless. This discussion is off topic so this is the last I'll respond to this thread out of courtesy to the thread starter.
Sorry about bringing up this old thread again, but I was wondering if it's possible to create a poll of the current scoring system (rally point vs old) people are using at the moment, regardless of what they actually prefer (e.g. club rules)? I don't seem to have the option of creating a poll.
