Yup, 60 seconds in the fifth game when the first side reaches 6 points. Also 60 seconds in between all games, always switching ends.
When the old 3x15 "server scores" system was changed to the 3x21 rally point system, I was sooo sceptical and was sure that this would be the end of "my" sport as I knew it and that I will never make friends with the new scoring. Well... just until I had an immediate epiphany as I played (and watched) the first actual matches with the new system. It was just so much better and so much more attractive as a player, as well as a spectator. Gone were those endless and vain "serve change only" moments that occured in almost all matches. With the new system, these moments at least brought you closer to the deciding phase of the game whereas there was still more than enough room for suprising comebacks and changes of momentum during a game and a match. This time, I forced myself to stay as open as possible and focus more on the positive aspects. I'm German... so this was tough as hell, believe me! I have followed this thread and the various tests that were done by BWF and others closely and we have also played some test matches during club night. The one thing that I was sure of pretty quickly was that some kind of setting is mandatory. Also in the current scoring system, the most thrilling rallies pretty much always happen when a game goes into setting. If you kill the setting, you would end up with one short moment of maximum thrill at 10-10 and that would be it. With a couple of points setting, the max-thrill-phase can last several points. So it was the right move from BWF to introduce the setting to 15 for the second testing phase, hands down. If I think about the consequences and possible changes for the players and the audience with having the new 5x11_15 system, I expect the following things to happen: Players need to focus a lot more on giving 100% from the first rally on. If you are a late-starter who usually starts the game with trailing back a couple of points, you will lose a lot more matches than currently. Each game consists of a starting phase of 4-5 points, then jumping directly to the deciding phase. That 10-12 points "in between" are skipped completely which will increase the mental pressure on the players not to give away points easily. There is just a lot less room for a turnaround if you're trailing 5 points behind. On the plus side, it is less crucial to lose one game and to start from scratch with the start of the next one. A couple of weak minutes will possibly cause to lose one game, which is 33% of the match. In the old system, you might also lose one game due to a short phase of weakness or loss of concentration - but this will be a whole 50% of the match there. So on one hand, there is a lot of pressure, on the other hand it is still less crucial if you screw up completely for a couple of minutes. If favors players that can adapt quickly to the style of their opponent and who can quickly figure out a working game plan. IMO players with an offensive and attacking play style will have an advantage too - and isn't it this precisely what we all want to see? Overall, the match durations will be shorter - more so for clearly one-sided matches, less for close matches with several games that go into setting. It will happen more often, that games are actively given away - either if a player is trailing back too much and doesn't want to invest more energy in a game that he/she will lose eitherway, or simply to catch some breath if you're already leading by two games. I expect this to be a bigger issue on a professional level than amongst us mere mortal amateurs. It will make singles matches more attractive amongst amateur players again. I know a lot of players in my club who have dropped playing singles completely since they simply don't have the stamina to go 2 or even 3 games to 21 points of singles on a decent and "satisfying" level. With less points to play, you need a tad less stamina to be able to enjoy a good match of singles. If I look around during our club nights, I barely see any singles matches that are played, which is kind of sad IMO. It peaked at our latest club internal championship (which is singles only): Only 5 men and 3 women took part. On professional level, it will make especially WD matches more attractive to watch. Having witnessed a 102 minutes all-japanese WD final of the 2016 Swiss Open live in the audience, I would have wished for a possibility to shorten this drama. The last 30 minutes were just plain boring and quite a lot of people left their seats to get something to eat or drink. Comparing the good and bad things, I come to my personal conclusion that there are more pro's than con's. Again, I was sceptical when I first read about the plans to change the scoring system again - why change a system that is working? The more time I spend thinking about it, the more I see the point of it. And actually I'm quite excited to play some more test matches with this scoring system during practise and to see for myself how it feels and which situations it will create.
Well, seeing the MD match between Indonesia and Chinese taipei, my conclusions are: We will see a lot of faster plays; i saw the indonesians practically smashes everything, the change of pace and dropshots are only used to get more smashes in. The deciding set will be played in even faster pace than usual 3rd set in normal 3-set 21 game, which is good for the spectator. As there is no one (correct me if i am wrong) in my recent memory, to chase a lead of more than 10 points.. i think 11 is a good score. Well.. it is still strange. I haven't tested it in a real game, so no comment there..
Sure, why would you think otherwise? Some overbooked private tournaments used to play 1x21_30, 2x21_30+11_11, or 3x21_21; those will probably go for 3x11_15 or 5x11_11. Thomas/Uber/Sudirman Cup usually has enough court time available so that all matches can be played .
How is that related in any way to the scoring system? IRS usage is not regulated, but in the past it was usually reserved to SuperSeries and higher.
It is really interesting to see new scoring format system 5 X 11 have been applied. I mean this type of new scoring format may have been able to bring some benefits to old veteran players such as Lee Hyun Il. I believe that this new format will also shorten the duration of the match a lot. However. I wonder whether the implementation of this new scoring format will kill off the interest of the spectators to watch the badminton matches live. I am not sure when this new format will be implemented. @phihag do you happen to know when this new scoring format will be implemented? Or this new scoring format is just for trial and will not be implemented at all during tournament time? I did watch all the matches of the recent Chinese Taipei live just to get the feel of how the new format system run. I find that matches played have become shorter. Sometimes before I get to enjoy the match and have fun while watching it, the match is already over. For example sometimes when there is a good versus a poor performing player, them match tends to finish very fast. With such score of 11-2, 11-3, 11-1, 11-2, 11-2 a match can finish just within 15 to 20 minutes. So I always wonder a lot and think. Is it good to implement this new scoring system during tournament time? What is your opinion here? @phihag
Why would it? As I wrote above, matches become more exciting to watch, and my experience is that the audience is much more focused. 5x11 is being tested in a number of Grand Prix-level and below tournaments. I'd count that as implementation during tournament time. I saw the list, but unfortunately did not get a copy of it. Unsurprisingly, every tournament opted for the sane option, option 1 (i.e. 2 points advantage required, up to 15). Officially, the tests will go to the end of 2017. However, as I wrote above, I think it's quite likely that the results will be discussed at the BWF Annual General Meeting in May 2017. I think you mean just 11-2 11-3 11-1. However, that's an extremely one-sided match - do you really want to watch it? As I wrote above already, I think 5x11_15 is a good idea for the spectators. Extremely one-sided matches are short, but I'd take that as an advantage. Close matches seem to go into overtime more often, and take about the same time (maybe a little less).
@phihag Thank you so much for your reply. I am still news to this scoring system. Yes indeed what you say could be correct. Correct I man just 11-2 11-3 11-1. Correct for me matches have ended pretty fast. But again depending on how the situation go, matches can be very exciting too. Thank you so much for your reply.
@phihag By the way, where does it say that best of 5 until 11 can be extended to 15? I couldn't find it in the rules book, only that it ends at 11... And also it says that there are 120 sec breaks not 60. Or am I looking at an outdated file? The new bwf wesite is extremely confusing and also still have some outdated rules files and a few links to them....
Yup, the regulations are only updated infrequently. If I were BWF king, I'd simply have added the new experiments to the bottom of Appendix 3. One reason why the experimental rules have only been distributed via various mailing lists may be that amending Appendix 3 would have needed some kind of official meeting and consent. Anyways, here is an online copy.
At first I was not so sure if I would like the scoring system to be changed. But I was curious enough to crunch some numbers (with a little knowledge about probabiltity theory) to find out what would happen (read: what could be expected) if two robots (easier to take robots instead of humans, just in case somebody questions the validity of your model ) with equal or different probabilities of winning a rally played a match under the different scoring systems. For those who are interested, I'll come up with some simplified findings: In general matches will have about 16-19 % less rallies than before. Robot 2 (the weaker) will win a game or match more likely than before. Examples (all numbers are percentages for Robot 1; 3x21/5x11): point prob. 50: winG prob. 50.0/50.0; winM prob. 50.0/50.0 (obviously, just to introduce the presentation format) point prob. 52: winG prob. 60.4/57.7; winM prob. 65.4/64.2 point prob. 54: winG prob. 70.1/65.1; winM prob. 78.6/76.6 point prob. 56: winG prob. 78.7/72.0; winM prob. 88.3/86.2 point prob. 58: winG prob. 85.6/78.2; winM prob. 94.4/92.7 point prob. 60: winG prob. 90.9/83.6; winM prob. 97.6/96.6 Thrill for the audience (probability of reaching 20-20/10-10; point prob. as above) will increase dramatically. 12.5/17.6 --- 12.1/17.3 --- 11.0/16.5 --- 9.4/15.2 --- 7.5/13.6 --- 5.5/11.7 So from a spectator's point of view I'm all in for the new format, as a player - well, depends on my opponent, I guess. Note: the probabilities of reaching 20-20 or 10-10 may occur as very high. Keep in mind that we are talking about robots with a never ending fighting spirit. 5-17 is as good as 15-17.
We tried the new scoring yesterday in local company tournament, wow, interesting and very challenging. Everyone loved it
One of my concerns with this new system, which has not already been raised by the other members, is that if there is a noticeable advantage for one of the sides of a court in terms of draft, a player who wins in straight games will get two games on the good side and only one game on the bad side, if he/she starts on the good side first, whereas in the current system they get one game on each side if they win in straight games. Is there anything being done to address this?
