Lets vote for New or Old point system.

The fact is that badminton is the only sport I can think of that has a defensive serve, therefore it shouldn't penalize the player by serving into the net.
Imagine if the score is 19-20, and the losing side serves into the net, that gives the leading side an automatic win without having to sweat. I would definitely demand my money back.

 

How about a bad line call? You loose a point, worse if it is a match point. :crying: Under the old system and if you are serving, you still have a chance but not with the new system!

 

I propose that IBF leave the current scoring system alone, instead allow the umpire to review a disputed call and overturn it if necessary. This will allow the media to go to commercial in order to generate revenue, or IBF would prefer to call it "media friendly".

 

Well this is something new. Maybe Han Jian in his book 'Basic Skills of Badminton' about the low serves in both singles and doubles, and Prakash's comments about low serves in singles in the 2005 World Championship in India, that the objective of the low serve is to attack, got it all wrong.
I see that you are a badminton coach. Perhaps you have developed something new. Have you ever seen a good low doubles serve in top level matches that got hit down? Is that possible? If yes, then it must have been hit down before the shuttle cross the net. After crossing the net, the best you could do to hit it down is to hit it into the net. That is why the receiver stands as near to the front service line as possible to reduce the-and here is the irony-'lift' of his reply or to do a net tumble at the earliest take.

 

I think that the majority of us prefer the service system. I'm not saying this for the sake of being conservative but because this system works well. I don't think we really are doing anything about it but complaining. I really hate the thought of the new system in 2008 China. We should do something about this. We really need to think of a plan for this. Don't you agree?

Keith

 

I think it is out of our hands. It always is. It is the VIPs with their votes that decide. But the system makes any change almost impossible to pass, and that includes the new scoring system. To get it voted in they must be a 2/3 majority, not a simple majority. If it is passed even with this high voting majority, then it is very difficult for any of us to wish it to go away. It will not.
Peter Gade did a flip-flop. Others may do the same thing. That is why I say, time is the best judge. Maybe the IBF will give the new system a little more time before a vote is taken. This will take out the heat of the moment-never good for wise decision making.

 

Hi taneepak,

I agree with your post #424.

We are now talking about different skill levels here.

If the low service is "perfect", that is, as soon as the shuttle passes the net tape the shuttle is already below the net tape... the receiving side has to hit up.

For those who could not follow what we are saying... draw on a piece of paper different trajectories of the flight of the shuttles... for services, net plays, dropshots, etc...

If you can serve well, such that the highest position of the shuttle in your receiver's side is below the net height , you force the receiver to hit up.

Of course, this depends on your skill level.

Let us take the Overhead Dropshot as an example. We all know that a perfect dropshot's trajectory is one that crosses the net 0.0001 cm above the net tape, falling infront of the net. I mean, as soon as the shuttle crosses the net tape, the shuttle is below the net height. The receiver has to hit up.

Our debate is really on the skill level of the server. Can he/she do a service that makes the highest position of the shuttle(when in his/her opponent's side/space) to be below the net height?

But this is not the end of the scenario. The receiver may also be of high skill. He/she can return the "perfect" low service with a "perfect" return-of-service, that is, as soon as the shuttle passes the net tape into the serving side/space, the shuttle is again below the net tape . Therefore, now the serving side has to hit up again.

Etc,etc,...

What I am saying is that... if you are skilled enough, you can force your opponent to hit up from any situation. But his/her "hitting up" can also force you to do a "hitting shot" too.

Cheers... chris@ccc

 

My question: why you only have the 'perfect' serve and not the 'perfect' return. If I master my return to perfection, does the server stand a chance? Just imagine all the options the receiver has against a low serve. What Prakash may not have said, is if the server does not have excellent overall skills, he is doomed with the low serve.

However good your serve is, a receiver with good technique can attack it. In doubles, the shuttle crossing the net low (is that called shaving the net?) is not necessarily an advantage to the server. This came from a Chinese national team coach. If you have more recent theories about the perfect and un-returnable low serve, please enlighten me as I believe, you have a large audience here.

 

For a low serve with this pattern, if the receiver intercepts the shuttle at its highest point, there is no possible return from the server.

 

Well, we can start here. Say I serve a perfect low doubles serve that crests the tape, then drops immediately to reach within an inch of your front service line. The serve is executed by me standing at the very front of my front service line with my body, racquet and hands 2' in front of me. Now tell me how are you going to attack this serve? Your reply return has to be taken at below tape height, even if you can move at the speed of a bullet.

 

Oops, did not see your post earlier. For these things I have to agree with you. I have long admired your problem-solving skills.

 

There's nothing to counter your perfect serve. However, in my training days I was shown your 'perfect' serve is the most easily return serve and with no possible reply for the server. The 2 coaches that I had then, one was a Chinese provincial head coach and another a Chinese national team coach. The latter resumed his duties as Chinese national team coach later. Seeing is believing.

 

You are not answering anything. If what you say is workable then all the great doubles players of today will be trembling in their pants when serving. I hope you are not talking about a return of serve that uses the racquet to hit the shuttle twice-once to receive the shuttle and bounce it up and then a second time to smack it down. That is an unreturnable return of serve. But is it legal?
Since you have quoted such high authority as a Chinese national coach who has taught you such devastating reply of a perfect serve, perhaps you can share it with us? I am keen to learn how its done?

 

Getting upset? Don't be

Not that I haven't answered you, but you did not understand the problem of your 'perfect serve'. Once over the net and starts descending path, is the best moment to attack it. Don't have to believe me, find your high level players friends opinion.

As to my former coach, he is quite well and highly respected in the Chinese National team. And you are right on this one, he is really an authority in badminton. Many things don't make sense to us, common mortal players, but is a whole different world for high-level players. Ever watched them in practice and the things they are able to do?

 

As your former coach he must have taught you how to kill the perfect serve. Pls explain how you can attack a descending shuttle. Are you sure you are not mixing up a good serve and a lousy serve? I agree you can easily kill off a lousy serve that ascends. I have a friend who was a former All England doubles champion, another a former Australian champion, and two others, a former China player and former Hong Kong champions. They never told me of the wonders of your extraordinary discovery.

 

If all your experts friends told you that a shuttle above the net is not 'killable', then so be it. I don't have any problems with your convictions and beliefs. And I don't have to convince you. I let you find it for yourself.

 

Woah, this forum has become more active than the last time I've been here . This isn't right though, it doesn't have to be the consensus who supports it. It should just be the majority (above 1/2 seems to be enough). We should really do something about it, I don't think we'd like the idea of a new system that more than half of the us would hate. Has anyone emailed the IBF?

Keith

 

Yes, it requires a 2/3 majority for this proposed law change. After this, it will become even more difficult, up to 3/4 majority or even higher. I hope this doesn't kill the game when necessary future changes become almost impossible.

 

This debate on low service is getting pointless and is getting too personal, as we all could decide to look at it from different angles and going in all different directions.

Personally I think we could look at how the strokes are used in the context of the game. Some of you might disagree but you have the right to choose what you believe.

When you do a disguise low service in a single game; your opponent will be very likely to be too slow to come to the net to attack by net kill or fast low push to the back corners, and he will be very likely to choose to lift or playing delay net stroke instead. However, it is not implying that low service is an attacking stroke! It is right to say that tactically low service might give you the better opportunity to attack in your next shot instead! Likewise you could use high service to give you the good opportunity to attack too; may be not in the 2nd shot but in the 3rd shot.

By the way; Karate like other martial arts; the essence of the art is self defence. The first move is to block the attack from the aggressor(s)! The second move is either kill or neutral.

I might call Han Jian and see how he is getting on nowadays and telling him about his book has been quoted in this forum! He must be very pleased.