Badminton, BWF, CHN, SSF tournament

[chris-ccc]

The shouting gave me painful eyes

There are several ways to get your point across.
SHOUTING is one of them - but it blurs the message.

Let's aim to keep this civil and even

.
Oldhand ... You are right. The shouting gave me painful eyes.
.

 

[bananakid]

.
bananakid ... Sorry that I have to disagree with you.

From post#5 of this thread:

And after the withdrawal of CHN, the players will be:
Mens Singles (No.1 from country):
1. Lee Chong Wei (MAS)
2. Sony Dwi Kuncoro (INA)
3. Peter Gade (DEN)
4. Lee Hyun ll (KOR)
5. Przemyslaw Wacha (POL)
6. Boonsak Ponsana (THA)
7. Chetan Anand (IDN)
8. Nguyen Tien Minh (VIE)

We all know that currently Badminton is big in 5 countries; namely, China, Denmark, Indonesia, Malaysia and Korea. But if Poland, Thailand, India and Vietnam can get a chance to participate in the SSF, I am sure that their country news media would give a mention about this SSF for Badminton.
.

I can't see how even if you put Andrew.D(of Canada), or Howard Bach(of U.S) or anybody else from North America will all of a sudden motivate any T.V channel to broadcast any badminton matches(or any highlights) in North America whatsoever... even if you put the entire Brazilian soccer team in a badminton court, they probably won't broadcast it in Brazil either. It's like they never show any highlights from the American "super bowl" in countries that don't give a crap about it.

Bottom line is if the people of a country are not interested in badminton, then there is no way in hell that any T.V network is dumb enough to show it no matter how many participants(from that nations) there are in the tournament.

In Canada, they won't even show the smallest clip of highlights from any badminton tournament whatsoever, not just the big sport channels, EVEN the small Chinese station won't show any badminton highlights in their news broadcast... that's how bad of an image badminton has.

Like I said, until the day badminton can be viewed(by the public, not me... I love badminton myself) as being more than a "SISSY" sport being played by overweight people, housewives, seniors, or people without any athletic abilities... badminton will only grow within Asia.

Let me show you some proof of how western societies view badminton:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CYFtDt2TU-s&feature=channel_page (time: 1:45, then 2:21 to 2:45) by the way, this cartoon was made before the 21 point system was introduced... and they couldn't even figure out the scoring system of badminton at the time.

In one episode of Simpsons.... Homer and Merge were playing badminton in their BACKYARD with the Indian couple!!! Way to go!!! badminton!!!!!!!



By the way, Thailand, India, Vietnam are all Asian countries... can we look further away from Asia???

Out of over 100 countries in the world... only Asia + England, France, Russia, Ireland, Poland, Sweden???, U.S, Canada and maybe a few more, even have representatives in a super series type of tournament. Nobody can tell me this sport is a worldwide sport(unless you are only counting the mileage between countries), because it is not as popular as one thinks... as a backyard game, maybe... but definitely not from a sport event perspective.

 

[ctjcad]

That's very obvious..

.
ctjcad ... As you can see in my reply to kwun, I think the SSF is organised to reward players, not nations.
....

..esp. in this SSF. But actually my notion goes more than that, which i've mentioned following the question "what is their goal in this SS Finale?".

 

[kwun]

.
To me, the new Super Series organised by the BWF is to reward players, not nations. Perhaps because of this, CBA is not interested.
.

ccc,

this is an interesting discussion that may touch on the fundamentals of how the professional badminton associations are structured.

firstly, i'd like to clarify why you think the SS/SSF is there to reward players instead of nations.

 

[RedShuttle]

ccc is flip-floping just to put down Chinese badminton. In one thread it's the nations; in another, it's the players.

I think it should be clear that SS is for the players. National interests in badminton are already well served by WC and the three cups.

Given the player-centric nature of SS, that's why I consider the 2-entry limit for the grand finale a hostile gesture. A 4-entry limit is more reasonable. I don't think the Chinese team qualifies more than three entries in any events anyway. It is mostly one or two, even without any limit.

 

[george@chongwei]

.
Oldhand ... You are right. The shouting gave me painful eyes.
.

same here..

 

[phaarix]

...even if you put the entire Brazilian soccer team in a badminton court, they probably won't broadcast it in Brazil either.

Haha I would be pretty surprised if they didn't. I know if the All Blacks (rugby team) went and did something crazy like that, New Zealand would definitely cover it in some way. Great entertainment .

 

[kwun]

ccc is flip-floping just to put down Chinese badminton. In one thread it's the nations; in another, it's the players.

I think it should be clear that SS is for the players. National interests in badminton are already well served by WC and the three cups.

Given the player-centric nature of SS, that's why I consider the 2-entry limit for the grand finale a hostile gesture. A 4-entry limit is more reasonable. I don't think the Chinese team qualifies more than three entries in any events anyway. It is mostly one or two, even without any limit.

let's not make any accusations and finger pointing. we want to foster civilized discussion and not start a fight.

 

[Oldhand]

Tony Gunawan is upset - very very upset.
The New Straits Times has his interview

 

[RedShuttle]

Tony Gunawan is upset - very very upset.
The New Straits Times has his interview

Not being part of the Olympic grind and at the tail end of his career, TG is in a different position from other players. He is free to chase prizes while the others are preparing for their careers in the next few years.

I don't mean disrespect to TG. He is still a force and his presence can enhance any competition.

I am still puzzled by how a hastily put togther tourney in a badminton hotbed can promote badminton further. At a time when the players are desperate for a rest, why scheduling two matches a day? The "avoiding injury" explanation sounds more and more reasonable.

 

[huangkwokhau]

Not being part of the Olympic grind and at the tail end of his career, TG is in a different position from other players. He is free to chase prizes while the others are preparing for their careers in the next few years.

I don't mean disrespect to TG. He is still a force and his presence can enhance any competition.

I am still puzzled by how a hastily put togther tourney in a badminton hotbed can promote badminton further. At a time when the players are desperate for a rest, why scheduling two matches a day? The "avoiding injury" explanation sounds more and more reasonable.

There are some discussions that BWF may reduce the number of Super Series and adding more prize money...

 

[ctjcad]

^^I kinda like that idea..^^

..i sort of mentioned abt it a long while back in one of the threads, as one option BWF can possibly explore. It will not only reduce the number of travel-related expenditures and possible injuries, but w/the limited number of SS events it'll make them even more imperative to attend. The increased prize money is an added enticement..The concept will be more like tennis' four big grand salami events..

 

[chris-ccc]

SSF tournament is there to reward players instead of nations

kwun ... Yes, we can clearly see that there is something wrong in the relationship between CBA and BWF. And it is quite frustrating for us Badminton fans to find these 2 bodies not getting along well. Both CBA and BWF are displaying a sense of overbearing self-worth or self-importance of their own.

Clearly, CBA is interested in maintaining their top positions in the world, in events like the Thomas Cup, the Uber Cup, the Sudirman Cup, the Olympic Games, etc... Probably, CBA concentrates on these events because titles are awarded to nations.

To me, the new Super Series organised by the BWF is to reward players, not nations. Perhaps because of this, CBA is not interested.

ccc,

this is an interesting discussion that may touch on the fundamentals of how the professional badminton associations are structured.

firstly, i'd like to clarify why you think the SS/SSF is there to reward players instead of nations.

.
kwun ... Why do I think the SSF tournament is there to reward players instead of nations?

Well, it is because the SSF invites players individually, when these players get to qualify, based on their SS Ranking points. All expenses are paid for, to the participants. Participants do not need their National Associations to food their bills.

If you remember what I mentioned in Post#11 in this thread, namely:
"I come from a school quite strong in sporting achievements and academic learnings. My school would often get invitations to participate in many competitions, namely; sports, quizzes, science and mathematics competitions, etc... My school also organised some of these competitions. When we organised our competitions, we would make sure that all schools in our region could be represented."

At my time, many of us students in our region decided to do something for ourselves and not just for our schools. We would raise funds to help fellow students to participate in our competitions. We tried not to use/exhaust our schools' budget.

We looked at us students challenging each other, regardless of which school we come from. But of course, from each school, fellow schoolmates would choose one who is best suited to be the representative. And we try to involve as many schools as possible in our region to participate, but only one representative from each school.

And the reward goes to the representative, not the school.


.

 

[chris-ccc]

Badminton should be best organised for our players, not our National Associations

Tony Gunawan is upset - very very upset.
The New Straits Times has his interview

.
Oldhand ... I can see why TG is upset. He is thinking for our players and for our sport.

He doesn't wish to have political parties, like National Associations, to cause problems to our sport.

Badminton should be best organised for our players, not our National Associations.


.

 

[ctjcad]

That's indeed a very good & noble cause..

.
...At my time, many of us students in our region decided to do something for ourselves and not just for our schools. We would raise funds to help fellow students to participate in our competitions. We tried not to use/exhaust our schools' budget.
....

..the concept is almost the same as BWF, except, it's the opposite/reversed. BWF, as the main body, is providing the funds while your school did not. In other words, you guys were like BWF, raising the funds for others.

 

[chris-ccc]

Reduce the quantity, but increase the quality should be a better policy

There are some discussions that BWF may reduce the number of Super Series and adding more prize money...

.
huangkwokhau ... Hope that BWF can do that.

Just finding some players, like WMC, still eager to participate in the 2008 SSF, even though injured, is quite unbelievable.

Reduce the quantity, but increase the quality should be a better policy.
.

 

[chris-ccc]

Tennis players prepare themselves for the 4 Grand Slams with greater intensity/effort

...i sort of mentioned abt it a long while back in one of the threads, as one option BWF can possibly explore. It will not only reduce the number of travel-related expenditures and possible injuries, but w/the limited number of SS events it'll make them even more imperative to attend. The increased prize money is an added enticement..The concept will be more like tennis' four big grand salami events..

.
ctjcad ... You are correct.

In fact, many Tennis players prepare themselves for the 4 Grand Slams with greater intensity/effort than they do for the Tennis International Davis Cup.


.

 

[chris-ccc]

Should BWF depend on National Associations?

..the concept is almost the same as BWF, except, it's the opposite/reversed. BWF, as the main body, is providing the funds while your school did not. In other words, you guys were like BWF, raising the funds for others.

.
ctjcad ... If BWF does not raise its own funds for players, then BWF will have to depend on Nationals Associations to sponsor our Badminton.

And our Badminton players would not be independent and free, like players in other sports like Tennis, Golf, Soccer, Basketball, etc...
.

 

[ye333]

The key point is that badminton, unfortunately, is still a country-based (not individual-based) sport. Among the "big 5", China and Korea are totally country-based, Malaysia and Indonesia have a little flavor of individualism, Europe is OK, but it's too weak to affect anything.

Due to this situation, any tournament is "important" to a team only if it will affect the country (for example, any tournament with OG ranking points is very important). As a consequence, SSF is a totally meaningless tournament to any team that is country-based. This is why China and Korea do not care about it, and may choose to not participate due to any arbitrary reason.

It is clear that the poor participation is not due to "quota". OG has quota, WC has quota, AG has quota, we didn't see Team China chose to stay home during those event, did we?

To me, the only hope for badminton is that China establish a good league.

.
Greetings,

Much have been said about CHN not interested in participating in the SSF tournament.

I see 2 main points here:
(1) The reason CHN gave for not participating in the SSF is because they said the SSF clashed with their team training session.
(2) The reason BWF gave for limiting the number of entries from each nation in the SSF is because they wanted as many countries as possible to participate in it.

I would like our BCers to answer 2 questions here:
(a) Should the SSF be moved to different time of the year so that CHN can participate in it?
(b) Should the SSF be limited to 1 player per event per country so that we can have 8 countries participating in each event?

In (a), I can see that CHN is following the seasonal year, while BWF is following the calendar year. But, Badminton is lucky because we play it indoor. So tournaments and/or training sessions could be rescheduled to different times of the year.

In (b), I would like to see that the SSF be organised for the No.1's from each country competing against each other. To enhance international rivalry, organising the No.1's from countries playing against each other is definitely better. And it should get many nationalistic fans more enthused. However, in terms of skill demonstration, watching the No.1 and No.2 from CHN might be better. They are currently the strongest nation in Badminton.

What are your thoughts/answers to questions (a) and (b)?


.

 

[RedShuttle]

The key point is that badminton, unfortunately, is still a country-based (not individual-based) sport. ...

Until the big monies are rolling in in troves, the backing of associations and government bodies are crucial.

However, on the specific topic of SS Masters participation, it is less of a "country-based" issue but more of a logistics issue.

The Chinese team was so exhausted after the Olympics. China Master was attended by essentially the B team. Skipping China Open was briefly entertained . Many of their top players are not fit physically or mentally to compete at a high level. They just want to shut down and get into their winter training routine.

We know that TH was forced to come by his sponsors. LCW and WMC are good soldiers. They didn't and couldn't back out for obvious reasons.

When you look at the big picture, skipping this event may be one of the more humane decisions made by the Chinese Team, in the interest of long term health and performance of the players.

Not that I like this decision, but I do think there are plausible and reasonable explanations such that this regrettable decision should be respected.