shot/sec count reflects how quick the ball travel between 2 players, it doesnt measures energy or power expended by the players. I know from watching tennis and badminton that badminton rallies in general last longer. Also, the comparison of 0.9 and 1.05 shot/sec from limited statistical samples tells me they are both comparable. It is the same analogy as taneepak saying lotus elite can out accelerate a 600hp mercedes benz but i countered by saying for how long of duration?? http://www.badmintoncentral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12040&page=20&pp=10
see how statistics lie the figures you posted said tennis players do 2 miles in 18 minutes badminton players do 4 miles in 37 minutes almost exactly the same speed, but badminton players are just slower. I think the distances travelled were not actually measured. I think they were estimated based on number of shots played. the numbers show 10.5 and 10.7 feet per shot for tennis and badminton I don't know if this is realistic I agree, we are unlikely to prove anything about tennis and badminton in general by comparing only 1 game of each.
The other thing is the size of court that each has to cover. Because in tennis the ball can bounce, the players have to cover a larger area than that marked out by the lines. My gut feeling is that those distance travelled figures are wrong.
energy is mostly spent on moving the body rather than the ball/shuttle. So from watching tennis and badminton, what do you think about the distance travelled by each (ignoring, for the moment, that badminton has more vertical component than tennis)
P.S. again, Han Jian v Morten Frost is not an average match. Total shots was 1972. The average number of shots/match in the Mens Singles games I've looked at is 1105 thats from 12 matches/31 games between 1982 and 2004 from finals and semi-finals between top players
well, u started out saying it correctly but ended up with an incorrect conclusion. More distance travelled (assuming that tennis players run more distance for the benefit of the doubt) does not equate to more energy expenditure. Energy is most demanding during burst starting and stopping (go measure the hp of your typical automobile brake system) which badminton has lot more than in tennis. Tennis players mostly bursting left and right, badminton players have to stop and go in N, NW, W, SW, S, SE, E, NE directions. Let me give u another example about energy expenditure. Why does fuel consumption on highway is higher than fuel consumption rate of the same car driven in the city?? Surely highway driving go more distance
- Sexiest Athlete (People Magazine's December 2003 issue of "Sexiest Men Alive") - Vogue Magazine - Mandy Moore - Playboy Mansion You are a strange, strange man (?) Did it ever occur to you that most high-level badminton players have freakish/ugly looking bodies that are disproportionately-balanced and "leg heavy" ? Don't hate the brother 'cause he meets more beautiful woman in one month than you will in one life.
WCH is at the end of his badminton career, which gives him ample time to pursue his next career. O'neal is still going strong which affords him little time to focus on becoming a doctor. He has stated that he wishes to get his doctorate degree and after having already achieved a Master's degree, it is very possible he will become a doctor once his playing days are done. O'neal provides for some of the best quotes, is extremely witty and very intelligent. You chose the wrong man to try to make a contrast. Don't hate on a brotha just 'cause he's bigger, stronger, brighter and sexier than you.
I didn't make a conclusion. I asked a question (admittedly I forgot the question mark). Is more energy required for { split-step & (left or right or forward or back) } than { split-step & (left or right) } ?
i dont admire people base on other people's taste or their popularity. u still a young and inexperience dude, there are lots of sexy women and men out there that aren't splash on tabloid and playboy/playgirl magazines. What make u think i dig the kind of women that idolize Mr. Roddick Please don't dramatize my point, did i say i dislike mr roddick? Can u name a badminton player with disproportional body? I gave one for tennis, peter sampra. My birthday isn't April 1 and you call me strange?? .
u should do a self test: a) sprinting forward b) sprinting left or right c) sprinting backward ask yourself which direction is fastest and slowest d) now repeat above in combination while in control and without tripping oneself : NW, SE, SE,NW, SW,NE,NE, W,W,S,SE,N,SW,NE, etc versus, E,W,W,E,W,E,E,W, etc
balancing cost energy frequency of directional changes cost more energy variable directional changes cost more energy than just left and right. All these energy costs are on top of energy to move your body mass of intended direction.
[size=+1]WARNING! ... [/size] You've stepped too close to cooler, pull out [size=+1]NOW![/size] Alpha One. -dave
I have a hard time understanding some of the posters obvious bias towards Tennis (brainwashed??)... Makes me wonder if they ever really played a high-paced game of badminton against a good defensive player?!?! I have lots of friends playing Tennis only.. But not a single one have actually tried to argue that Tennis would be more physically demanding than Badminton.. Rather the opposite when they tried both games..They may like Tennis more as a game, but they could agree that it simply has lower pace, less jumps, lounges and longer resting time between points etc (which btw could be seen as a positive thing, that you can play a decent game without stressing your body to much) I like the game of golf more than Tennis.. Still I would argue that the game Tennis is more physically demanding than game of golf..for example :-D Comparing Tennis and Badminton is a bit like comparing the game Cluedo with Chess. It's easier to get the hang of the basics of badminton/chess, but harder to get the finer details, teqniques, finesses, deceptions, strategies etc needed for advanced play compared to Cluedo/Tennis which may be initally harder to learn but less added complexity when the basics are mastered...It becomes more of a matter to fine-tune the basic stokes (which of course also is a daunting task to optimize, but not as interesting in my view). /Twobeer
So i Played badminton about everyday when i was in High school plus 5 comp per years. Two states final 1 silver and an 1 bronze, twice versus the same team who played at higher level in some kind of ''badminton academy'' Now i'm in college and i play 2-3 times a week ( about 7hour) and make lots on inter-college tournament. So i think i played enought badminton to argue on it. I play tennis about 100 time less than badminton and i can still say that it's a harder sport to master. And i know it's a less endurance sport but still harder
huh? you agreed shots/s were comparable, so it should follow that frequency of direction changes is similar do they? or do you put the same amount of energy into each direction, but for some it just means you move slower ?
your questions are getting ridiculous. 1. a child can answer your this question 2. i did not agreed shots/s were comparable, I said i was being conservative and gave this assumption the benefit of the doubt to being similar to tennis. Come on, your questioning reflects your shallow understanding of footwork. U r saying all badminton players, even pros, foot and body movement go toward retrieving shots 100% of the time? There's no wastage of footwork? Take a look of badminton player in preparing change of direction stance, both feet are off the court. What position a tennis player in preparation stance? they waggle (mostly their hip) left and right in waiting for the opponent making the serve. 3. how often u see tennis players running backward to chase the ball?
I would agree that doing a good serve in tennis is "harder" than serving in badminton, hitting full power shot and still get it inside the lines is "harder" in Tennis.. But hitting a good sliced drop in badminton is probably as hard as hitting a topspin tennis forhand in my opinion.. Hitting a badminton backhand cross clear is imop harder than hitting a sliced tennis-backhand, and so on. Also, getting a point on a good player on your serve is probably alot harder in badminton than in Tennis Even though it sounds like you are a really good badminton-player..I think the number of winning points from you against "masters" like lin dan would be less than a player of similar level of play in tennis would get against Federer or Roddick.. Just by the nature of the game. When I watch clay-court tennis a lot of the rallies seems to be played with big big margins (ball bounce closer to the service line than the baseline in lenght for example).. Looking at top-badminton player each shot seems to be much more precise...or else.. big jumpsmash...kill So this is of course the classic oranges and apples comparison...But given the variety of shots, precision, and stamina required for badminton I would say badminton is the overall hardest game to master.. And of course I am biassed (I don't think there is such a thing as a totally unbiassed player of either sport ) Another indicator that Tennis may not be that hard, is looking at the top-players of racketlon (a combination event with 4 disciplines, squash, badminton, table-tennis & tennis).. Most of the top players have a background in Squash, Table-tennis or badminton... Very few of the top-men/women have had Tennis as their main background... http://web.telia.com/~u31240261/teampres.html Cheers, Twobeer
It's a simple logic benasp. If you get some tennis training, and play it 100X more than badminton, you'll be a very good competitive tennis player as well, and therefore tennis won't seem as 'hard'.
