Rally Point Scoring

[The Expert]

Lot's of people seem against it however looks fine to me, results seem within the norms and it is foolish to say it encourages people to play safe. Pressure points arrive quicker and games are over quicker. The attitude of the IBF suggests the Asians like it. Much easier for the general public to understand as well plus everyone is playing it on the circuit, probably a fait accompli as far as the IBF is concerned.

[CWB]

Lot's of people seem against it however looks fine to me, results seem within the norms and it is foolish to say it encourages people to play safe. Pressure points arrive quicker and games are over quicker. The attitude of the IBF suggests the Asians like it. Much easier for the general public to understand as well plus everyone is playing it on the circuit, probably a fait accompli as far as the IBF is concerned.

You may well be right about its adoption being a foregone conclusion - albeit a political one.

However, it changes the character of badminton and removes at a stroke any claim badminton has to be the toughest racquaet sport with the biggest premium on fitness.

It is a bad move, introduced to solve a problem that does not exist.

[chris wild]

:) I can't see any downside. It makes do ditterence to the game, either pace of, styal of, toughness of etc. The only difference is that each rally will score. Each doubles player is responsible & there is no 'second chance'.The games are longer if they are evenly matched (is it 29/28). Our girls are quite rightly no longer treated like inferior animals who can't last as long as fellers. (That me tarzan you Jane nonesense still exists in some dark corners of badminton clubs that I know of) One sided games can be over quicker. It is less idiocyncratic to the uninitiated; therefore more likely to attract new participants. It is easier to umpire & we need more umpires ( I did the unpiring course & like most of the candidates did not enjoy the doubles aspect so I decided to stay with coaching - sadly, I am not alone).
All sports must evolve or die. :)

[BairnAgain]

:) I can't see any downside. It makes do ditterence to the game, either pace of, styal of, toughness of etc. The only difference is that each rally will score. Each doubles player is responsible & there is no 'second chance'.The games are longer if they are evenly matched (is it 29/28). Our girls are quite rightly no longer treated like inferior animals who can't last as long as fellers. (That me tarzan you Jane nonesense still exists in some dark corners of badminton clubs that I know of) One sided games can be over quicker. It is less idiocyncratic to the uninitiated; therefore more likely to attract new participants. It is easier to umpire & we need more umpires ( I did the unpiring course & like most of the candidates did not enjoy the doubles aspect so I decided to stay with coaching - sadly, I am not alone).
All sports must evolve or die. :)

This new scoring system is waaaassssshhhhh, a pathetic attempt to make the game more commercially viable. Tennis matches, during majors, can last up to 2 and a half hours yet look at the prize money, media coverage, etc that that particular sport attracts!!

The game needs to be marketed more efficiently and proffessionally not drastically changed!!