hi ctjcad, glad that you agree with my opinions. as this thread has grown to some 40 pages, it is hard (if not impossible) to keep it on track all the time. haha. as to the commercialization, i think it doesn't matter which country starts it first. what matters is that it must not be a governmental thing, again. it can only be made possible by some rich and ambitious people who loves badmintion. if IBF wanna take the job, playing a role like ATP & WTA, get rich first. Very much off topic now. If you wanna talk more, let's start a new thread.
In my opinion, one of the most important features that is present in the OSS and is lost in the NSS, is the property that I call "self-adjustment" of the game. It means that the number of rallies that one has to win increases for tough and persistent matches. A strong player can win only 15 rallies against a weak one (now 21 - can be too boring), and it can be much more than 30 when the players of equal strength are playing. And this is good - the rule "more interesting match should last longer" is important. It is interesting to see how this rule is applied to other sports, for example tennis. The serving side there possesses a significant advantage, so they obviously cannot use the system where only the serving side scores and the side winning the rally serves - such a score system would be very "unstable" for tennis. So, they choose to serve in turn, but each game must be won with a difference of at least 2 balls, each set - with a difference of at least 2 games, otherwise tiebreak, etc. In other words, there are a lot of points where a tough battle can begin, when the score does not move, and such battles (and such matches) are the most interesting! I think everybody agree with this statement as it concerns of tennis, why do they think it is boring in badminton??? Now the transition from OSS to NSS is often compared with the similar process in volleyball some years ago. But in volleyball the situation was quite different: the serving side there was in significant disadvantage, so when the equal teams were played, almost 90% of the rallies were the service change without scoring. Now this relation is more even due to more agressive serving technique, but when they decided to switch to NSS, their reasons were quite clear. In badminton, luckily, the service in general does not give any significant advantage or disadvantage to any side - this is a very interesting and fortunate feature! You can say, of course, that the receiving side possesses an attack, but it does not mean an advantage! Simply account the probability of winning a rally when two players of equal strength are playing, and you will see that it actually does not depend on who is serving. This means that in badminton the OSS ideally carried out the function of "self-adjustment" of the game without any undesired side effects. It allowed to begin a tough battle (like break-point in tennis) at any time, at any score! In NSS only at the end of game this is possible. Many great matches which made the history of badminton simply wouldn't be possible with NSS - they would have completed at the stage when in OSS all the most interesting would only have started... Some more observations. Not only the "dynamic" feature is what we like the game for. The "thinking" aspect is not less important, but one need some time and some freedom for thinking, especially for thinking under pressure. Some time is necessary to learn how your opponent plays, to try different ideas and to find the way how to overcome him. If you do this in NSS, it will be most probably too late... I can agree that some "potentially" non-interesting matches in OSS can become more interesting in NSS, but this merely concerns the matches where the "dynamic" component prevail over "thinking". On the other hand, some "potentially" great matches in OSS are killed by NSS. I even can agree that "in the average" it can be almost the same, but for the game developing itself, I think it is much better to make for the success of "potentially great" matches rather then attempts to attract non-prepared audience by "more stupid, but very dynamic" show. One more observation about NSS - the "random" component of the results increased. Much more surprising results appeared last time. I guess it was one of the purposes of IBF when implementing the NSS - make the tournaments less predictable, break the dominance of some countries, and therefore attract more attention from other countries... As a temporary solution it could be not so bad, but in general... In OSS who plays better wins - in NSS who is more lucky... Not so straight, of course, but the movement is in this very direction. This is one of the reasons why I don't believe most of the top players when they tell they like the NSS. I think, they simply follow the rule "never show to your opponent that you are in trouble". This is a good tactics on court, and outside the court as well. All this story with NSS is a very good example how to make the people to voluntarily adopt something they do not like. After all these experiments with SS: 5*7, than "updated old" SS (11 points for WD and XD), than back to the "old good" SS, and again new experiment with 21*3 system, - if the last changes would not be adopted, it would be a big impact on IBF reputation, it would seem too ridicules... They needed at last to adopt some changes, just in order to save their face. The crucial mistake was made when they decided to continue with SS experiments after the clear signs from the Badminton world that the OSS is quite good and DON'T NEED TO BE CHANGED. And when they decided to continue, the final decision was already inevitable... I would prefer if they directed their activity to some other fields... OK, what can we do in the present situation? I hope, the popularity of badminton in the world will grow in the next years. Of course, I do not think that NSS will do this, there are many other reasons. But then we can say: "OK, the purpose the NSS was implemented for is fulfilled, now many people all around the world like and understand the game, so now we can switch back to OSS, which is better for true connoisseurs. Thanks to NSS for a game promotion and good bye." I think this is the only way to return the right SS (that is OSS of course) which can be acceptable for IBF, so they will save (more or less) their faces. What is your opinion?
*applause* *standing ovation* I'm gonna print this out and stick it on every notice board in every badminton club that I can find.
Dmitry, good write up.. well, Dmitry, i'll second vlkbad...*standing applause* for me as well.. i, for one, am quite surprised by your comprehensive point of view..good write up- now we just have to wait for a reply on this from Mr. taneepak himself..
But this thread is about something else from what you chaps are talking about. This thread is not appropriate now. Perhaps some one else can start a more relevant thread.
Thanks to vlkbad and ctjcad for your kind words. I am sorry if I posted off topic, I understand that I was maybe too late, but I wonder what is this thread about, if it is "about something else"?
Don't worry about Taneepak. He lives on a different planet and will defend the mistakes of Punch until the cows come home. You posts are relevant and very well analysed. Well done.
Whats the point? after a hundred years IBF decides to change the scoring on a whim.... not the marketting, not the quality of tv coverage, not promotion, not through sponsorship or comercials, not thru hosting exibitions .... nah just change the scorring system at random and that will fix all your problems. but who listens anyway?
Some more observations from watching the WC matches. First, a lot of mistakes on service in doubles, not only service fault calls, but also serving into the net, serving too short, etc. The NSS works just the opposite way than it was expected. The fact that you cannot afford mistakes on service put so much pressure on players that they make much more mistakes than before. Sometimes they serve too safely (too high - fearing to serve into the net), and immediately are killed on the net. So much rallies of one-two strokes... Second, in OSS such mistakes and immediate kills do not move the score, so the players have time to cool off and start playing, but in NSS such consecutive rallies from both sides result in significant part of the score points are gained by this way, without any play. Some of the matches expected to be great turned out to be so boring... Boring and short: 20-25 minutes to make all these simple mistakes, 3-4 good rallies and it's over. Is it what IBF wanted to promote the sport?
After some conversation with players using NSS in recent tournaments (club levels), I think NSS might be a terrible idea for club level type of tournaments. The reason is, since NSS makes the game ends very fast, the "home team" takes great advantage in the game, as they are much more comfortable with the facility (court, light, wind, etc) and shuttles to be used. The "guest" usually takes longer time to adjust their games, and low level tournaments don't give you enough warm up time to prepare. Therefore, before the guests even get used to the new environment, they might be down a lot due to "unforced errors". Personally, I think NSS is a better fit for higher level of plays, as the players are more experienced and usually given enough time to get used to the facility and shuttles. For club level players, NSS is just a total nightmare if you are on the wrong side.
It says a lot on why the OSS is the way it is. They should have more respect for the people who develop the original system. The old saying that 'if its not broke, don't fix it' has a lot of meaning here.
Mental toughness and strength are what separate the NSS from the OSS. With supreme confidence a receiver can stare down at the server, sending shivers down his spine, and lo and behold the server either nets it or serves high, only to be put away. If the server does not have nerves of steel, especially at a critical stage of the game, then he can only blame his lack of mental strength instead of the NSS. This is what it is all about-a strong mind plus exquisite play.
What does NSS mean? Short for NonSenSe? What amazes me in your post, is that you kept playing for 40+ (?) years a game that was not demanding mentally and phisically for you. In other words you wasted 40+ years of your time not very wisely. What has kept you in a sport that was not appealling and interesting to you?
Is that a pathetic way of playing badminton? Why not have Sir Dink stare down at you and see how well you serve fack or not flack?
You have to understand Mr. Chan's health issue. His knees are shot. Our sympathy goes to him. The NSS benefits him in this regard.
