I believe that if the IBF were to persist with the old scoring system there is a good chance that the mixed doubles will be dropped. Having all the 5 formats but with reduced total time will go some way to fend this off. This is the case with both tennis and table tennis. There are rumours they are even talking about dropping the doubles in table tennis in the 2008 Olympics and replacing them with something else. Badminton is lucky to have all the 5 formats included in the Olympics. But this will make it difficult to defend should the tennis and table tennis federations want to push for mixed doubles in 2008 in Beijing. They can always argue why only for badminton and not for them?
Why change the rules of a game which is ancient? Badminton is the oldest racket sport.....leave it the way it is! There you go Longreach is getting mad again! rraaaahhhh!
Thumbs up for Taneepak Please refer to the following for a change of paradigm: 1) Tanee's comments 2) Latest news from punch: http://www.internationalbadminton.org/latest_title_jan30.asp And below is a pdf of the new game: http://www.badminton.org.au/Rally%20Point%20Trial/Rally%20Point%20Scoring%20System%2007_20%5B1%5D.pdf
Agree with you!... let's play a pure badminton game! now every player are busy to switch to new point system which alot of fans think is necessary
Yes, Puriety! Don't fix things that are not broken!----> what next? an overhead service like tennis,lol:crying: j/k Keep badminton original and pure!
from badzine.de: http://badzine.de/news.asp?id=609 Taufik Hidayat and Peter Gade criticize "3x21" ... Olympia winner Taufik Hidayat expressed itself on the occasion of the Thomas Cup qualification of the Asia zone in India little pleased over the new system.... "I do not like the system at all. In order to be honest, I can begin whit it absolutely nothing. And I know that all the current top players see that exactly the same ". ... Peter Gade, recently express itself similarly to the press agency AFP: "I cannot imagine that the IBF prefers this system. For me is a pure political affair. Table tennis had the last 50 years exactly this system. They changed it with large success on 5x11, because the old system was not tv fitting. And now we take this system and believe, that would be the best system for us. Nobody could bring me so far a reason for it. We had the chance to make badminton more exciting. With 15 point system a match can be exciting only with 11-11 or 12-12. And now we play to 21, which makes still worse all. All pure politics. I think, the Asian people regret it now that they not have taken the 5x7 system and now naturally can't any longer back. 5x7 is the best system for our kind of sport ", explains Peter Gade. Hope this translation is ok since the german text itself was a (not so good)translation.
Yes, it is time for all to stand up and fight! This is destroying the game which is rich in tradition and puriety! It is what diffines badminton as a racket sport and differs from others and should be kepted. The rules of the badminton will be lost.......fight to keep these acient laws of battle with the use of a shuttlecock.......it is what separates us as a whole! Why change a game that has been around longer than everything else? Do not anger longreach, he is more powerfull than you think! muahahaha
I have my doubts about those votes, seeing how Punch is a dictatorial machiavelic incompetent president (ie. see EBU case). And his minions aren't any better. Se democratic voting? Right....
Well, if you care to check the number of votes each country carries you will think the other way. The votes some weak countries (weak in badminton but big in democracy) is a joke. That is why you need many one-vote third world countires to counter balance the historical baggage of the one-sided votes the old IBF gave to many badminton weak countries.
I think that is highly improbable. The United Kingdom has 10 votes, France 5, and Canada 5. Compared to the much stronger countries like Indonesia (5 votes), Malaysia (5 votes), and China (5 votes), the first three weaker countries (in badminton) have more votes (20 votes) than the 3 Asian badminton giants (15 votes). How could the UK, France and Canada, countries that could not even host a single 5 star tournament, have so manay votes. No, they did not get these votes through corruption. They got these votes from the old IBF, legally. How would you call this?
It is very simple, isn't it? The IBF made the decision and it must, therefore, be right. How can you possibly complain about anything that the Infallible Badminton Federation has introduced?
Improbable??? ... but already the case! And about France, UK etc.... Taneepak, I am beginning to think you may be racist somehow.... These countries have high number of registered players and finance IBF proportionnally. The problem of having five stars events is a problem of finding sponsors which is obviously very difficult in countries where the money goes traditionnally to many other sports in priority (football, rugby, tennis etc...) and we do have a lot of trouble bringing money to badminton. So yes, it's true that votes at the IBF are not linked to getting olympics medals or organizing five star events. No, they are not democratical as far too many countries have five votes, even with a limited number of registered players, so federations who actually represent a big number of players do not get an adequate representation. And yes, political and economical pressure is put on minor countries so that they vote in a certain way... (don't worry, this is usually Punch's way )
If you look up the history of IBF I think you'll find UK, Canada and France as the founding members of the federation, in addition to Holland, New Zealand and Denmark. That may have to do with their vote allocations.
This thread is about voting for the old or new point system. Actually there are the delegates from all Member Associations of the IBF that are to vote. Here on the IBF site, are the statutes of the Federation: http://www.worldbadminton.net/statutes.asp on page 31: (Rule) 5. GOVERNMENT 5.1 The Federation (that is the IBF) shall be governed by a General Meeting (see Rule 7), which delegates from all Member Associations shall be entitled to attend. The qualifications for attendance and the voting powers of the delegates shall be as set out in Rule 13, but the Chair (see Rule 7.6) shall have a casting vote.... (Rule) 13. 13. REPRESENTATION AND VOTING STRENGTH AT GENERAL MEETINGS ... 13.4 A Member Association having paid a subscription shall be entitled to a minimum of one vote and a maximum of five votes in accordance with the size of its affiliated membership of active players, as established to the satisfaction of Council. This shall apply automatically as at the date of the meeting: Number of Players Votes fewer than 5,000 - 1 5,000 - 9,999 2 10,000 - 24,999 3 25,000 - 49,999 4 50,000 or more 5 ... I wonder how this delegates get theirs mandate, or how the Member Association came to an opinion about this topic. I never read something about that in Germany (maybe my fault). It looks like the president of the german badminton federation have very much to decide . It looks also that he is a good friend of Punch Gunalan . (Germany gets one IBF Training centre in Saarbrücken) So we may tell ours delegates what we think about this point systems.
I think it is useful for members to visit this site and read through the 300 pages of the IBF Statutes for 2005/2006, Book 1 and Book 2. There is a lot of information covering almost everything about badminton, including badminton for the disabled.
