[BWF]Keen Tussle to Host 2014-2017 Cycle of BWF World Superseries
- Thread starter cxytdn
- Start date
21 for this year.
so how can people say lin dan is like federer in badminton?
in 2008,lin dan play 8 tournaments only.
this year 9 tournaments
federere play 2 years=lindan 4 years
Li YB main duty/KPI is to win major honours for CHINA - players personal glories and achievements in SuperSeries are secondary unless they directly affect the chances for CHINA eg when China need to fill up the top 10 in MS in order to get 3 players into Olympics then in that Olympic year, all out !!
Jagdpanther
Regular Member
Oh, sure. Why not? Throughout history, lots of battles were won by tiring out the supposedly superior forces.Don't understand why it should annoy you if you think the problem or concern is largely Li YB/CBA's only. Let it affect the CHN players, good for the ROW who are happy with it, isn't it?On the contrary, you should be delighted.
Ever heard of Stalingrad?
A packed tournament schedule and more money in the game is an interesting development. On the one hand, it's difficult for the National Associations to prioritise their players. But the problem is not the scheduling.
The following is going to be the real problem:
Increased choice and earning power for the players is going to decrease the influence of the national associations. We will see more players going independent. The problem that holds players from going independent is that registration for tournaments is still held by the respective National Association of that player. If this registration bypasses the National Association, then things will become very interesting.
So it is in a National Association's interest to not let their players earn too much in case they lose the player!
The following is going to be the real problem:
Increased choice and earning power for the players is going to decrease the influence of the national associations. We will see more players going independent. The problem that holds players from going independent is that registration for tournaments is still held by the respective National Association of that player. If this registration bypasses the National Association, then things will become very interesting.
So it is in a National Association's interest to not let their players earn too much in case they lose the player!
RedShuttle
Regular Member
The problem is that there really isn't that much money to earn for badminton players. Consequently, many players are still relying on their associations for support.
In order to get the big money, badminton has to reach beyond badminton enthusiasts. Just look at how many people know about Federer and Nadal but never played a game of tennis.
BWF has its own properties (SS, GPG, etc) to protect. But in the long run, until the casual fans and even non-fans are drawn into the sport, badminton will not see the big money. Casual fans have no idea about and no interest in SS. BWF needs the BA's to bring new fans into the sport through local developments.
The current number of SS meets is quite reasonable. It is just a matter of creating convenient time windows for local competitions by scheduling and coordination with the BA's.
In order to get the big money, badminton has to reach beyond badminton enthusiasts. Just look at how many people know about Federer and Nadal but never played a game of tennis.
BWF has its own properties (SS, GPG, etc) to protect. But in the long run, until the casual fans and even non-fans are drawn into the sport, badminton will not see the big money. Casual fans have no idea about and no interest in SS. BWF needs the BA's to bring new fans into the sport through local developments.
The current number of SS meets is quite reasonable. It is just a matter of creating convenient time windows for local competitions by scheduling and coordination with the BA's.
As for prize money, there is simply no comparison between tennis and badminton. Any Grand Slam title in tennis is worth more than 10 Superseries badminton titles.
Just take the Australian Open 2012
[TD="class: dkBlueBgWhiteText"]PRIZE Money (in US$) for Australian Open 2012 Men's and Women's Singles[/TD]
[TD="class: blueBg, bgcolor: #029ACD"][/TD]
1st Round $20,800
2nd Round $33,300
3rd Round $54,625
4th Round $109,250
Quarter finalist $218,500
Semi finalist $437,000
Runners-up $1,150,000
Winners $2,300,000
Just winning R1 alone it's US$20,800. So why wouldn't Federer play 19 tournaments? When Lin Dan is compared to Roger Federer by the well-known badminton writer,Dev Sukumar, it is not the number of tournaments played but the accolades won and dominance in their respective sports. Even the prizemoney or rewards for Lin Dan in the Olympic year for having won gold is a far cry from what Federer gained in any typical year.
In badminton tournaments this year, Intanon so far already played 21 (not including CBSL which is spread over 3 months and in between other tournaments) while Sung JH 20, though only a few of them were played to 5 rounds, several were early exits.
Indeed, to popularise and promote badminton worldwide and individually in each country so as to attract big money as well, BWF and the member associations must work closely together in every aspect, starting with better scheduling and coordination of international tournaments with the various BAs, and not just concentrate on the BWF-sanctioned SS/GPGs.
Without a wide fan base of both the casual or recreational players and the enthusiasts, badminton will have a long way to catch up with tennis in popularity,publicity and prizemoney, perhaps with the exception of China, Indonesia and Malaysia but not in terms of prize money. Just the number of TV telecasts, live and delayed, for tennis and badminton should give you an idea of where the two sports stand to each other.
Just take the Australian Open 2012
[TD="class: dkBlueBgWhiteText"]PRIZE Money (in US$) for Australian Open 2012 Men's and Women's Singles[/TD]
[TD="class: blueBg, bgcolor: #029ACD"][/TD]
1st Round $20,800
2nd Round $33,300
3rd Round $54,625
4th Round $109,250
Quarter finalist $218,500
Semi finalist $437,000
Runners-up $1,150,000
Winners $2,300,000
Just winning R1 alone it's US$20,800. So why wouldn't Federer play 19 tournaments? When Lin Dan is compared to Roger Federer by the well-known badminton writer,Dev Sukumar, it is not the number of tournaments played but the accolades won and dominance in their respective sports. Even the prizemoney or rewards for Lin Dan in the Olympic year for having won gold is a far cry from what Federer gained in any typical year.
In badminton tournaments this year, Intanon so far already played 21 (not including CBSL which is spread over 3 months and in between other tournaments) while Sung JH 20, though only a few of them were played to 5 rounds, several were early exits.
Indeed, to popularise and promote badminton worldwide and individually in each country so as to attract big money as well, BWF and the member associations must work closely together in every aspect, starting with better scheduling and coordination of international tournaments with the various BAs, and not just concentrate on the BWF-sanctioned SS/GPGs.
Without a wide fan base of both the casual or recreational players and the enthusiasts, badminton will have a long way to catch up with tennis in popularity,publicity and prizemoney, perhaps with the exception of China, Indonesia and Malaysia but not in terms of prize money. Just the number of TV telecasts, live and delayed, for tennis and badminton should give you an idea of where the two sports stand to each other.
eaglehelang
Regular Member
mE=Justin L;2011883]Don't understand why it should annoy you if you think the problem or concern is lrgely Li YB/CBA's only. Let it affect the CHN players, good for the ROW who are happy with it, isn't it?trary, you should be delighted.[/QUOTE]
Because each and every time I have to read about it either in the press or in this forum, like an old grandmother nagging. Plus there will be people like you who will start posts on how tiring it is for China players, blah blah, again.
It also shows how LYB and CBA try to use their position to influence BWF. It's like China is the dominant country,they are great, their schedule must be adhered to first. Even non badminton fans can see this
trary, you should be delighted.[/QUOTE]Because each and every time I have to read about it either in the press or in this forum, like an old grandmother nagging. Plus there will be people like you who will start posts on how tiring it is for China players, blah blah, again.
It also shows how LYB and CBA try to use their position to influence BWF. It's like China is the dominant country,they are great, their schedule must be adhered to first. Even non badminton fans can see this
Last edited:
The Battle of Stalingrad? An inapt,insensitive reference,the insinuation even worse. I won't trivialise such an immense tragedy, one that opens up an old wound symbolising the enormous loss of lives of the former Soviet Union, to the tune of 20 million according to some historians, in both military and civilian casualties in the Second World War when she fought and defeated Nazi Germany led by Hitler whose greatest mistake was to invade Russia.Oh, sure. Why not? Throughout history, lots of battles were won by tiring out the supposedly superior forces.
Ever heard of Stalingrad?
I wouldn't exactly say it,because at present Asia is the growth engine of the world.
If badminton can create enough fan base here,it can create huge money.For example take cricket,U.S and European(except England) countries are nowhere in the picture,but it has created a league which is the world’s No. 2 sporting league in terms of average pay – only considering weekly pay.The thing is that it must tap markets.Badminton badly requires marketing.
Jagdpanther
Regular Member
Ah, glad you've touched up disturbing facts of war, sir. Terrible indeed, yet humanity is doomed to repeat such "mistake", namely war, again and again until the End of Time. Because people have this... innate desire for conflict. Of course, I am not immune. Are you?
Sport and war, what differences do they have? Both require strategy, both may deploy dirty tactics, both become tools for government to demonstrate their nation's superiority over others. The strong is always right, the strong can dictate others.
OK, back to topic. Let's see... Congrats, Australia!