The reason I said that it was not targeting China because it is actually common rule for all sports in Olympics; not just about badminton. At once, there was a debate of professionalism vs amateurism. Today, Olympic Committee no longer prevented professional players to play in Olympic Games. But the goal to have most NOCs in Olympics remains intact. That's exactly the purpose of Olympic Games or World Championships. Do you suggest that China is dominating all sports in Olympic Games?
As many people nicely said, it has nothing to do with the measurement of the performance of player; it has everything to do with national pride, having national anthem sung or national flag flown. How is that has anything to do with elite competition when many of the best players are not even competing?
I believe that we have already mentioned the reasoning. The qualification is not purely based upon World Ranking. NOC/member association does have discretion when it comes to who can play in OG/WC. The best players of badminton according to official rule means that the highest-ranked players regardless of nationality. Top ten players are required to play in all SSP and four further SS or face the penalty of USD5000 or more severe disciplinary actions. A couple of top ten players couldn't even play in OG/WC due to the rules. The reason this post started in the first place because a fairly high-ranked player, Vittinghus, could not play in OG. Top players, according to BWF, are those in top 25 of World Ranking. http://system.bwf.website/documents...tion 1A - General Competition Regulations.pdf Read 2.9.1
The Best Players according to me are Lee Chong Wei, Chen Long, Jan O Jorgensen, Viktor Axelsen and Son Wan Ho. All are playing in the Olympics and will give their level best. If some good players are missing,that's only because they are not the best in their respective nation.Doesn't make the competition any easier. And You can't deny that Olympics is the most prestigious event in Badminton world.
How ranking works is that you make it further you get higher ranking points. In OG, you make it to the semi-final does not mean you are better. Because top seeds face practically very few competition in early rounds. As far as official ranking/measure of strength is concerned, it's about the world ranking and nothing else. Tian Houwei is the top 10 player. So as Wang Shixian, Luo Ying/Luo Yu, Ko Song Hyun/Shin Baek Cheol, just to name a few. Tougher competition in early rounds also mean higher likelihood for upset in early rounds. Also, top players need greater stamina, determination, physical strength, endurance, etc. to play well in all of their matches if they face strong opponents in every round. It's certainly means that it's competition of elite level. It also means that player need to play consistently in every match he plays.
You make a case of easier early rounds but what about the later rounds which are the toughest to win due to skull crushing tension, burden of hopes of entire nation,overcoming ocean of thoughts coming to you,chance of writing your name in Golden words.What about all that? I still believe Olympics is harder than any SS. The mental pressure is just of another level.
Yes, I agree. Mental pressure is higher due to prestige. But as far as the level of badminton being played, is it of highest level? Just like in Thomas Cup 2014, I'm not sure if you remember the final between Malaysia and Japan. Everyone can agree that the MS3 is far from being elite level. Both players played poorly. It's about mental pressure. But we are talking about badminton competition of highest level. The commentators Gill Clark & Morten Frost said that it was a nervous match, from the beginning till the end. It's fair to say that the most exciting/interesting matches to be watched are more often to be found in SS. If nobody is playing freely, or your opponents are not playing at their best, it would mean that the level of competition is lower. It takes two to make a good competition. Does it make you a better player if you beat your opponent who plays poorly? Perhaps more recently, CL again played below par in Thomas Cup 2016? Just like he did in Thomas Cup 2014 & Asian Games Team Competition 2014? As far as badminton is concerned, the greatest prestige is team competition; because it is for the nation, not because of the level of badminton being played
Thomas Cup is not Olympics. Olympics sees a nation's glory due to individual heroics. Your view that SS/SSP presents a higher level of competition/badminton/performances than Olympics is not correct imo. Best players present their best on biggest occassions and are most invested in the events like Olympics which makes it more fun/exciting to watch than a regular SS/SSP. Let's agree to disagree here.
Olympics is interesting in one way. Some players can play at their relatively high level for being able to handle mental pressure. Most players are aiming for Olympics and preparing for it. However, when it comes to real-world performance, it does not mean that you can perform the way you like. As far as player's capability and strength are concerned, it's about long-time and consistent training. That is, you don't become a good/bad player overnight. If it's a competition among the best players, it's more possible to have great match to watch, although there are also cases where top players played poorly at times. That's also exactly the reason why we need ten best tournament results to count toward world ranking, instead of using only ONE result. It's the spirit of sport or code of conduct of badminton player that player make their best effort to win every match. It's a serious offense if they don't do it.
Oofff how can somebody write and repeat same old story umpteenth time. I am personally pissed off reading and most certainly request/demand/advice to stop the now "dull" lullaby! PS: pardon my language
When a lot of people do not bother to read BWF's regulations, they simply couldn't make sense of what really happened. Vittinghus would not make it to 2020 Olympics. On the other hand, thanks to his dedication, he finally won a Superseries title after many years of competing in the World of Badminton. As some people nicely put it, he was simply born in the wrong country. At this age, people should be able to read for themselves from http://bwfcorporate.com/regulations/. Unlike at pre-Internet age, how BWF or IBF back then operates is pretty obscure. Now, it's pretty transparent. The only issue here is that people DO NOT bother to read from official web site; they relied much from hearsay. Chinese media did not bother to correctly report BWF's official policy or regulations. They are living in their own interpretation.
Many fair points mentioned by thljcl. We can also understand that people are pissed off by them, as they run counter most of badminton fans' representation. I think why it is so is because thljcl fail to acknowledge the fact that, unlike tennis, badminton is a country-dominated sport. Tennis is individually-based sport. National federations play a role in the formation of youth, but quite a little with professional players. A whole lot of consequences derives from this trait.
I personally have appreciated and infact agreed to many of his points and sentiments but as far as my "pissed Offness" is concerned that is simply because round and round thorough repetition of the same argument! + there is a big flaw , "Olympics is just Olympics" (there's nothing bigger than that) it maybe true that because of the new rules it makes the Competition a lil weaker the sheer aura and the pressure to fair in the extravaganza and the aforementioned endlessly repeated "National Pride" is so immense that nothing else can even come close. And these just aren't my words, for an analogy why's winning AE is more imp to many players and considered more prestigious although the quantity/quality of the opp one fill crosswords is exactly the same in MAS PSS or even more or less in FRA SS! Much said.. No offense to anyone is intentioned and no further debate is expected
I did mention that badminton did not have the same level of commercialization/promotion as compared with tennis. On the other hand, while centralized training mechanism did play important roles to nurture young players, the individual special talents as well as hard work should be not be overlooked. Badminton in today's world, although far behind compared with tennis, IS professional sport. That it, the likes of Saina Nehwal, LCW, Chou Tien Chen, Misaki Matsutomo, etc, they are full-time athletes. Quite a number of players play as independent players. Denmark and Japan do have mature club system compared with China or Malaysia. A couple of people/organization tried to develop club system in Malaysia but it's still at the stage of infancy. It has been a perception that China has dominated the world of badminton even today. But that is not completely true. Yes, China did win five gold medals from 2012 Olympics or in certain edition of WC. You just have look at the list of winners from Superseries to draw a completely different conclusion. Nation is free to send any number of athletes to participate in Superseries as long as their world ranking is high enough. Take a look at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amateur_sports and also https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_sports Without doubt, prize-money-oriented tournaments as well as sponsorship deals are traits of professional sport. In the case of Malaysia, traditionally, Malaysia's MS is pretty weak, so does Spain or Thailand. I don't think that India's women's Singles is particularly strong either. Yes, Saina Nehwal is doing very well and even once became World NO 1. China is the strong nation for having many good players. But dominating the world of badminton requires players who can top the world ranking. That's hard to find everywhere, with or without national training system. I have to say that the media coverage of badminton is in much better shape compared with the past; hence some players can actually be rich from playing badmintons as they get much sponsorship. It's also interesting how after 10 editions of Superseries, they still failed to get much recognition from badminton fans. I supposed OG/WC would continue to be in the heart of many people for the years to come regardless of how the players play. Perception-wise, All-England is the most special tournament. Officially, it's one of five SSP events, having the equal status of the rest of four events. But I'm not sure that many people would view all five events equally because that's what perception does. As some people rightly point out, no matter what I said or how many evidence I put here, changing perception is hard. That's just the way it is. Not knowing what SSP/SS is constantly making many people overlook the difficulty of winning a SS titles. In all likelihood, if another newcomers coming asking the same question all over again, should I repeat the same points I made or just leave it? Some people have just asked me to leave it. To me, it depends on how they ask and what they ask.
Just because CHN is not dominating all Olympic sports doesn't make it less unfair. Your argument is obviously flawed, fallacious. At least all the best one or two in every qualified NOC are participating, artificially restricted by the BWF ruling to give more athletes from different places a chance to medal and satisfy the desire of every athlete to take part as far as possible. What I say almost sound like a truism, I'm surprised you didn't get it. The qualification rules for badminton were different prior to Beijing 2008.
You unconsciously assumed he is incomparable, one and only by himself right at the top, not to be mentioned in the same breath with the rest.
How can this be true? CBA like every one else has to abide by the BWF rules and regulations or they are out. If they foolishly or recklessly do as you claim (can't imagine you even think that), they do so at their own peril, out of the question.
