A tennis ball has been recorded travelling at 150mph-a serve by Andy Roddick in a Davis Cup match for the USA, however i believe that some people can smash a shuttlecock close to 200mph, so badminton is definitely faster-although i'm told that a tennis ball would hurt far more!
Even if the rallies end fast, but it depends on what kind of shot end that rally. Some shots are just amazing and out of the blue; some can be unforced errors or just plain bad hits. If you play tennis, you would think it's exciting because you know those shots are difficult to perform. Of course badminton players think watching tennis is boring. Badminton always has longer rallies. They're two different games.
In badminton, the court is much smaller so it is easier for you to get hit especially in the head. In tennis, the court is much bigger so why would your opponent smash right at you? Also, in tennis, the ball travels much lower compared to badminton. Duh. If you get hit in tennis, it's most likely in the stomach, or crotch (for guys....ouch). Unless your up volleying and you're in la la land (like me), you would get hit in the head or something. I don't think a lot of people get hit in the eye in tennis, anyway. Getting hit in the lower part of the body by tennis hurts a lot more. I don't think I really care or feel much if I get hit by a birdie in the stomach or whatever. But in the eye, tennis ball is definitely better. Birdie would hurt way more.
In tennis, your targets are more limited, mostly to the ground. In badminton there are just too many targets or points in space and on the floor, giving you more room and variations. This becomes obvious if you watch a doubles game in tennis and then a doubles game in badminton. Frankly, I don't understand why they bother with doubles in tennis.
tennis is a more glamarous sport. ppl who live in condos in singapore would easily prefer tennis to badminton cos almost all condos comes withat least 2 courts. and the fashiion that goes along with tennis always will attract more girls.( caps, tops, short shirts, shoes, nice big rackets etc) even in club house, there is always tennis court, simply becos it is easier to build. badminton needs to be indoor to cut out the wind factor. tennis dont need. i used to play tennis, i switch to badminton not becos its easier, but becos when i book the courts, i will definitely get to play when i turn up. for tennis, many a times i happily look forward to the game and end up having it cancelled due to wet weather. really kill joy. tennis is more stength intensive, thats why the players are generally bigger size. the force coming from tennis ball is so much greater. dont believe go to the court and try to flick the ball to an angle using your wrist like the way you would when recieving a smash in badminton. to attract more female players, the level of play can always be adjusted so that they will have a good game too ( talking about beginners here, i know that there are a lot of good lady players that will have to lower their game play so that i can play w them too). its the fashion that needs to be changed. yonex ans all need to come out w nicer outfit than polo shirt and shorts for them. if not after a game its very unglam to even go for a drink in a cafe in those outfit.
Yeah, i kinda see it this way too. Not only is tv and how the sport is portrayed the problem, but also the image that the players give off. for instance, you put two live mens singles games side by side and have people decide which one appears to be more appealing, the number of people that choose badminton and the number of people that choose tennis might be close. but if you get a certain age group such as high school students to choose which type of player they'd rather be, they'd most likely say tennis. i hate to admit it, but i think the reason us badminton players are looked down on is because we're too "nerdy" and "geeky" sometimes. this is like 90% true in my school. like...the contrast is so obvious. 9/10 people on the team at my school are A or B average band students. the tennis team only has 2/10 people like that on their team. the rest are hardcore hotshots like the basketball and football players. like...people just look at the players and turn away from the sport cause they think its "nerdy". if people in school really want their classmates to look at badminton seriously, they'll have to be able to 'fit-in' and not be so "perfect". but oh well...we try to share such a wonderful sport with people and they just look down on us. personally...i don't think i should care...it's their loss. they don't know what they're missing
badminton is stereotyped as an asian sport. asians are stereotyped as band geeks. badminton is also played at a very very low level in schools in north america and therefore pales in comparison to other intramural sports. However, cities with clubs ie calgary, toronto, vancouver often have greater interests in badminton due to people seeing how competitive the sport is a high levels. At higher levels badminton players also take no a very high level of athleticism in relation to other sports such as volleyball, football, tennis and a higher skill level such as track, swimming, football, volleyball, ect. Badminton will not gain popular support in north america until it is shown at the national / international level to people everywhere, not only those privaleged or lucky enough to be part of a club.
just to add on, tv coverage for tennis is extensive and for someone who have never play the game, it is more interesting to watch cos its amazing how they can generate so much power!!!! but for badminton, unless you play the sport, watching the game seems rather easy. dont think anyone can imagine how difficult to move from baseline to a netting shock from you opponent, the pro always makes it look so easy.
No way. Badminton is a great sport to watch on TV! I have like 20 badminton matches on my comp and have burned them on DVDs to watch on our plasma and it is exciting! Especially when a player makes great defensive saves over and over again. What badminton needs is a measure of each smash and more TV statistics such as average smash power, number of jump smash winners, ect. Statistics such as that give the viewer more appreciation of what is going on. Also if they could somehow count the number of times a player changes direction or the length they cover on the court, average number of rallies per game... Also if we could get some numbers on how much international players leg press and squat that would give non badminton player viewers a greater appreciation of the tremendous str required to play! Like i play a lot on the national circuit and leg press 500lbs for reps squat 200lbs for reps and donkey press 400 lbs for reps... i know some guys on the national squad do way more than that.. i can't imagine what someone like chen hong or xia presses and would love to find out.... speaking of which im going to ask JR on his forum
look people... theres not much point arguing this. every sport has its potential, u cant compare 2 different sports and say this one is harder to play than that one. every sport is different, and depends on the ppl who play them. for example... i hate to do math and think it's the hardest **** in the world but some SOBs can do it in a blink of an eye.
Proof badminton is more difficult. Taken from the below site... this was 20 years ago as well and badminton is much more demanding today! http://www.bnl.gov/bera/activities/bminton/ten-bad.html "Tennis vs. Badminton Statistics don't lie. The speed and the stamina required for badminton are far greater than for any other racket sport. At the 1985 All England (Tennis) Championships, Boris Becker defeated Kevin Curren 6-3, 6-7, 7-6, 6-4. At the 1985 World Badminton Championships in Calgary, Canada, Han Jian of China defeated Morten Frost of Denmark, 14-18, 15-10, 15-8. The following is a statistical comparison of those matches. Tennis Badminton Time: 3 hrs & 18 mins 1 hr & 16 mins Ball/Shuttle in Play: 18 mins 37 mins Match Intensity*: 9 percent 48 percent Rallies: 299 146 Shots: 1,004 1,972 Shots Per Rally: 3.4 3.5 Distance Covered: 2 miles 4 miles * The actual time the ball/shuttle was in flight, divided by the length of the match. Note that the badminton players competed for half the time, yet ran twice as far and hit nearly twice as many shots. " The table isn't looking very good.... if u want it clearer goto the site.
May not be the best source to reference as: 1) Squash (other racket sport) is more stamina intensive than badminton (with both squash and badminton being far more intensive than tennis) 2) Shots per rally under Badminton should read 13.5 not 3.5. If it were 3.5 badminton would be as boring as tennis. On a side note, badminton isn't more demanding now than it was 20 years ago (at least from a stamina/distance covered/match intensity perspective). Have you seen how often the modern player switches shuttles? Every two rallies. Some players feel the need to switch rackets at least twice a match, towel down every couple points, take water breaks every change of service...
Why are you guys comparing two different sports? It's like comparing my ass to your face, they're almost the same! (sarcasm) I think it's the person's OWN opinion that matters the most to him or her to determine which sport is better. Whichever one you play more intensively is probably the better sport in your opinion or not. Asians aren't stereotyped as band geeks here for sure. There aren't very many asians in band... asians are just stereotyped as just plain geeks I like tennis better because I can tan and find more places to play tennis. Badminton I have to pay money to play on their courts -.- (but it was pretty fun when there were open courts for us to play freely)
u had commented on something i had believed for the longest time about tennis pros, they are mostly upper body strength. Look at pete sampras, long torso, relatively shorter leg. Badminton body is better balanced. Yes, badminton singles players are more leggy but doubles players aren't still all upper body like tennis players. Remember, doubles badminton relies quite heavily on jumpsmash so having frog like legs are still desired. Here is a quote taken from a newspaper article on sport and genes: Andy Roddick, owner of the fastest recoreded tennis serve -249 km/hr -owes much of his power to the unusual flexibility of his ribs and spine. Bob Prichard, president of Somax Sports, a Calif. clinic that works with top athletes, say Mr. roddick's ability to arch his back increases the effective external rotations of this arm to 130 deg., 44% better than the average tennis pros. While mr. roddick legs help him generate power, they're not exceptional: Even though he's 6 foot 2, say his coach, Brad Gilbert, "the guy can't dunk a basketball". LOL. I rather have a badminton body thank u very much.
Ya I read that article today as well. I want them to do some tests on top level badminton players, compare their reactions, their flexibility, lactic acid tolerance, explosive power to other athletes in different sports and see how the stack up. I want to see how badminton players scientifically stack up against other athletes in other sports. I can almost gaurantee that the average intelligence of a badminton player is higher (not meant to offend) than your average high performance athlete. I mean.. the shot placement, tactics, remembering opponenets strengths / weaknesses... only racket sports make you do that to the same level because its one versus one. As we all know its not the fastest or the strongest that always wins. Wong Choon Han is becoming a doctor... do you think Shaquille O'neal is going to become a doctor anytime soon? Bball is probably my second favorite sport btw. Oh and by the way at 6"0 I can dunk on regulation nets. I don't think I can bend my back so far tho. Keith Chan I bet can though, some of his jump smashes are his back is crazy arc'd.
The tests that badminton players would excel in I believe would be the rate at which thier muscles can generate maximal power. Changing directions so fast is maybe the defining motion of elite level badminton.
Oh, but they can. that's why governments like to use them A figure that isn't highlighted is the number of shots per second while the ball/shuttle is in play. Tennis 0.93 Badminton 0.89 Therefore, during the rallies the tennis players were working harder. No wonder they need such long breaks more seriously, I've seen those figures before, but not known which specific matches they were. I don't think it's a fair comparison. Boris liked to serve and volley which leads to shorter rallies, and both badminton players were quite defensive which leads to longer rallies. Wimbledon 2005 Final was 15.2% shots/s 0.9 (only Set 2 analysed) All England 2004 Final was 26.5% shots/s 1.05 I think most modern MS games are sub 30%, but the shots/s is increasing
Yea.. You are right about the danger of statistics .. The statistics on shots/sek becomes very skewed if there is a lot of serve-aces in tennis for example (1 shot in 0.1 sek? ).. So for that statistic to have any meaning it would probably be more "fair" to only include rallies logner than for example 5-shots and not including the time/shot of the serve /Twobeer
Tennis players may hit more shots persecond but are they running as far to get each shot? No, because another statistic says that badminton players run longer, faster and in a shorter time than tennis players. This thread is never going to prove anything, so no one take it personally, but I do find all the comparisons interesting.
