Next time before you call someone an idiot, think first! Sometimes the "feeling" of experienced players isn't that wrong!! Just to give a first impression, I've done some stats! Of course this is no definite answer, but results are so clear, that I have no doubt they are correct. Tournament: Denmark Open. Discipline: Men's doubles. Semifinals and Final (=3 matches, 6 games). Semis: Lee/Yoo vs. Boe/Mogensen 21:14, 21:17. 70% of point by the returner. Fu/Zhang vs. Ko/Shin 21:15 23:21 59% won by returner. Final: Fu/Zhang vs.Lee/Yoo 21:13 25:23 62.5% won by returner. Overall (3 matches): 64.6% won by returner. That is a HUGE advantage for the returner and perfectly in the range of 60-70% I expected. Please note that there were 4 rather clear results, 2 games were close. I expect the advantage of the returner to be even bigger in very close games. Of course, if the result 21:5 21:5, the server will win more points. But still the receiver has an advantage, which the winning team in this case can compensate by other means.
because the point winner serves. If the loser serves, the result maybe different. If serving is a disadvantage, if the loser of the rally does the serve, the point gap will be bigger than if the winner of the rally serves (the current system).
Exactly. There is a big difficulty with the statistics presented - are they causation or an association?
Nope there isn't. it;s very easy. if you win the rally, you win the serve. - If you serve, you can win or lose the rally - according to post #41, the server loses the rally more than the receiver so the serve is a result of you winning the rally, not making you winning the match.
Any suggestions for ommited variables? Nothing changes except the server. Everything else stays exactly the same. I can't think of anything that causes omitted variable bias. Maybe you see something? By the way: Everyone who has ever played men's doubles on a higher level knows, that you get under pressure when serving and that you're happy to win points while serving. While winning the point when returning is "a must". Every higher level player will tell you the same, the (raw) statistics tell you so. And I have yet to see another cause. To me, the message is crystal-clear...
Whilst 3 observations don't make a rule, I find Footwork's premise credible. I can think of 2 variables to expand the study: 1) How close the match was. Silly case, but at least 20 out of 21 points will be won by the server in a 21-0. Seriously though, looking at games which went to 3 versus games finished in 2. If the theory holds true, then you'd expect the games to 3 to have a higher "receiver percentage" as any different between the sides is implied to be smaller. 2) Standard of play. Whilst the theory may be true for higher levels, that doesn't mandate that it'll hold for weaker standards of play. At lower levels, weak and/or "funny" serves aren't routinely punished. Would be interesting to see if lower levels were closer to 50:50 Of course, if you really wanted to (dis)prove the point, you'd set up a control group which would play half their games conventionally and the other half with 'loser serves' (losing side changes side, serve from the box indicated by your opponent's score etc). Personally, I feel that (overall) the serve is (to some extent) a disadvantage, which tends to make games slightly closer. However, even if that is true, I do not see justification for change.
Ok, so if classifying it as an advantage or disadvantage is so important, what will you do differently to capitalise on that knowledge? I for one will not change the way I serve or return tomorrow as a result of "knowing" it is an advantage or disadvantage. Nor (I believe) will pros. We will all still aim to serve and return in the same manner that will give us the best chance of winning the point - end of. Hence I find this thread a tad pointless.
You're point 1) is not valid. To measure the advantage of the server, you should only watch very close matches I believe. In a 21:0 match, the servers are so much better, that they win the points DESPITE the fact that serving is to their disadvantage. So the skill difference covers the fact that serving is a disadvantage. In close games, where skills are about equal, I expect the advantage of returning to even be bigger than the 65% I counted. Your point 2) is of course true! The worse the players are, the more random the distribution of points will become, the more it will go to 50:50. Anything may happen in beginners games...;-) That's a different story! For competitive doubles play, I truly believe that returning is a huge advantage. Which isn't per se good or bad. But a fact you have to cope with.
If the rule changes, the serving way changes, becoming like what I advice here: http://www.badmintoncentral.com/for...-we-change-how-we-serve?p=2284527#post2284527 then you must change. int the current serving rule, why do many choose backhand serve, why not choose forehand serve. If you can do an overhead smash, why must you use an underhand clear. it goes like that. why must we change from 15 to 21 to 11. There are advantages and disadvantages. That is the real aim I think.
But keep in mind, that when the games is 14 and 14 and server/returner wins 50%, there is still an advantage for the returner! If the margin is that big, there HAVE to be some service streaks. Which doen't mean serving is an advantage... If I win 21:5, 21:5 and lose all 10 points on my service, the statistics say, the server has a big advantage! In fact, serving would be a big disadvantage, because I lose 10 points on service and none on receiving. Sometimes skill differences (or something else) are that large, that you win more serves than you lose ALTHOUGH serving is an disadvantage... In the WD-Semis (Denmark Open), the advantage for the returner is 55% and 60%. But you're right, the advantage seems to be less pronounced in WD than in MD...
I think it's a bit bias by using a rally win as an argument for advantage, because even if the service is a disadvantage, players can still win by their skill, stamina or heart (and luck). I think it's better to have "offensive move". And I think it's nearly 100% that a serve is attacked and the returning shot by the receiver is an attacking shot that is downwards and forcing a lift for the server. unless the opponent lift the serve.
At higher levels of play, the serve is mostly at a disadvantage because it'll be attacked, unless it is perfect. Think about it, how much pressure do the pros feel when they're serving. Even I feel their pressure when I watch them serve.
I think it's clear that serving is a major disadvantage in doubles categories. More than 60% is won by receiver as someone pointed out. Is there any advantage or disadvantage in singles however? I think receiver should still have an advantage, but it could be very minor. Of course the serve is not as important in singles, as you have more marginal for error (the serve has to be pretty bad to be killed off immediately).
In the French Open MS-Final, server and receiver do exactly 50% of points. This somewhat supports the theory that serving is less importnat in singles. I would expect there to be a small advantage for receiving in singles (as you have some more options than the server), but wouldn't expect the advantage to be big.
Service in Badminton is neither an advantage nor a disadvantage Fully agree with Cheung. It is simple, to win one has to score more points than opponent. When you win a point against server, services changes and you have to serve and unless you win more points on your serve as compared to opponent, you will not score more than opponent. I feel, service in Badminton is neither an advantage nor a disadvantage. But player with good service skill and control as compared to his opponent will have definite advantage. If a player feels disadvantaged while serving, then probably he is not fully prepared and hence not confident of his service. In a process he will become nervous, will not serve properly and will lose points. To win in Badminton, winning player or pair will have to serve more than opponent, if player feels serving is a disadvantage, chances of winning will reduce.
service in Badminton is neither an advantage nor a disadvantage Fully agree. Absolutely, can't argue. Pick up score sheet of any match and it is crystal clear that, winner would have served more as compared to loser. Service in Badminton is neither an advantage nor a disadvantage. But to win, winner will have to serve more and will have to win points on serve.
Service is neither an advantage nor a disadvantage in Badminton Dear |_Footwork_| I simply want to counter you with another mathematical and statistical fact. Winners of all the three matches quoted by you have actually served more, as compared to losers. Winner always serves more as compared to loser in any Badminton match. I do not have score sheet to refer to right now to quote exact number of serves by each player. I do not know from where I can get a score sheet. One way of doing it is to re-write the score sheet by watching video of the match. I will do that, if I find time. But fact remains fact. Service is neither an advantage nor a disadvantage in Badminton. But to win you have to serve more than your opponent. So serve more and better than your opponent, i.e. turn service to your advantage to win.
