It's simple. If badminton is to emulate tennis's success, the game has to be professionalized. That means individuals playing against each other for money they can keep. That means a loss is felt in the pocketbook. That means no association to bail them out. Can you imagine without the safety net of associations how much more players will have to fight for their meals. A LCW v LD match will be an all-out brawl. Badminton Associations have their part in developing the sport from a grassroots level. Like parents, they need to let their offsprings go when they are old enough. Right now with the sport at a crossroads, because of self-interest, I see association involvement hindering its progress.
OK kids, let me ask you this. Which one comes first? 1) Volleyball 2) Beach Volleyball Which one is more popular on TV in US and EU? 1) Volleyball 2) Beach Volleyball Why is there more TV showing #2 now a day? 1) Glamor 2) Prize money 3) TV rating and commercial money Regarding the LCW and BAM comment. LCW can sign with LN. No one can stop him. He can cut tie with BAM. LCW figure YY gives him better contract overall than LN. That is all.
Alright, that's it then, I propose that we have beach badminton (an evolution of backyard badminton) in order to "glamourize" our sport! Of course, ladies must wear bikinis, and guys must wear shorts, only... Now, how do we go about signing up a sports network...
Sorry, I don't see the point here. Are you saying that badminton players now aren't professional enough, that they need more motivation? That maybe Lin Dan could lift his game if he just tried a bit harder?
no, what he means is that the individual player should be free just to represent himself and not his association or his country. so that his obligations are simpler and not tied into other players and coaches in his team and association, making it easier to negotiate endorsements with companies, etc. like the way it is now with pro golfers, tennis players, etc.
Adding to the above. It also means if players knew there was no safety net, they'd learn to take care of themselves like real professional athletes do in tennis. It brings a different kind of pressure when you know every win in essential in order to put food on the table. I suppose LD or LCW are not good examples for this explanation as they are at the pinnacle of the food chain. The next level of MS players (Boonsak, PG, Simon, PSH, Tago, CL, BCL, etc) would find out very quickly that making a living from a pro badminton circuit is different from one while under their Association's care. Yes, they reap the rewards, but they also bear the costs of participation.
No. May be Speedo. Sorry, I am not among the 10% who might find him attractive in Speedo. May be you are? Sorry, Kwun. I am scooping very low now... Where is Master LSD when I need him to scoop even lower...
stooping... as for your "attractive" attempt, that's ok, but you're way off course; he's not really my type... just a couple of incorrect items in the inventory list. Probably escaped your attention...
I have to say this is might actually be the main reason. However, instead of just America, I think we need to further extend it to almost the entire western world / culture in general. As soccer does not draw enough attention in US, but with the help of the rest of europe (prime league, etc), it still "sell" pretty well. However, badminton is mainly played and dominated by the so-call "3rd world nations", with very few exceptions. Therefore, the rich and powerful (too bad politics get involved in every sport these days), can not simply accept the fact that their own "high class heros" got beaten or toyed by the "poors" or "low level classes". Therefore, in order not to boost up the image of the "3rd world", they simply decide to continuously put badminton, as well as other "low class games" into the dark world...
As some members have said here it is not so easy to become independent players as there are many considerations to ponder. The highly successful ones like LCW, LD, TH and even PG, should not have too much problem but the less successful ones will continue to need assistance from their national associations and BWF.
There's the issue about the production team as well. I've seen a lot of good 60- or 90-second lead-ups and summaries shown before the start of a tennis match; in badminton, it has been mostly absent. It doesn't take much to produce a really interesting player lead-up or a behind-the-scene short and insert it into the broadcast. Most of the material is readily available, and all the production team really need to do to finish it, is a 10 or 15-second interview with the player, which is then edited into the programme as the thread that weaves the story together. It generates massive interest in the proceedings, because it provides an instant historical perspective and lets the audience glimpse the mind of the protagonist. Tennis (and other sports) has used this very successfully. Badminton has not. All I see are literally minutes of static camera feeds in between games. It's a shame. It makes a lot of (marginal fans) people reach for the remote, where otherwise they would remain glued, and add to the ratings. Just another 0.05c...
It's not as simple as that. BAM can ban LCW from International tournaments for 2 years, as was done with TCS when he wanted to leave BAM. Associations still have power to endorse who goes for tournaments. As for the skirt issue, you guys are not the ones who have to be wearing them(short+skirt), easy to say, unpractical on many counts as discussed in the other threads.
Yes, an organization like BAM can ban a player representing his or her country in Olympic or evens like that. However, they can not ban the player from SS event where BAM has no control over the event.
I'm sure we can still remember the great controversy over the change in the points scoring system from the old 15 points to the present 21. BWF's intention was to make the game more popular with the simplified rally point system and shorten the game with the resultant benefit of less fatigue and injury to players. There was hue and cry from many quarters but as it turned out the game made another important stride in advancement.
http://sports.yahoo.com/tennis/blog...WTA-s-new-ad-campaign-Strong-is?urn=ten-wp635 http://www.wtatennis.com/page/strongisbeautiful
. I thought a solution come from what was hinted in my post (Post #21). Until Badminton can find the 2 extra bodies that can be formed to protect players wishing to play professionally (independent from their National Associations), then we shall see commercial enterprises/companies investing in Badminton. In the last few posts, we see that WTA is trying to advertise for women players (to capture more spectators to watch women players play). For the International Tennis Federation (ITF), it's mostly about Tennis as a sport. For the Association of Tennis Professionals (ATP) and the Women's Tennis Association (WTA), it's mostly about Tennis as a commercial/entertainment show (on TV or live on court). This is what I think anyway. Why? Just look at our Olympic Tennis matches/events (organised by the ITF). They are not as well-watched as compared to the those matches/events organised by ATP and/or WTA (which are televised throughout many countries worldwide). Speaking from Australia, I see less TV coverage of Tennis matches played at the Olympic Games; but more of ATP and WTA matches (played outside the Olympics). .
The first step could/should be to detach the Super Series from the BWF and have it run independantly as a pro tour ...
