Rally point system. Thought you all might like.

[Chuck Dalton]

Re-evaluating the 3*21 Scoring System

The previous article I wrote I criticized the decision to change
badminton’s scoring system. I felt that the decision was made based on
the pressure that the IBF was feeling to change the game, and not that
they really thought it was the best option for the sport. I did not
see the connection between the 3*21 scoring system, and improved
marketability of the sport. However, after going to the Thomas and
Uber Cups in Tokyo and watching the scoring system in action for
myself, as well as my experiences at a badminton exhibition in the
USA, my opinions have changed drastically.

I am a badminton player myself, and have played badminton since I was
4 years old. So it is safe to say that it would be hard for me to
follow along with this scoring system change without some resistance
at first. I have been playing with the same scoring system for all of
that time, except for the brief time when the IBF experimented with
the 5*7 scoring system. I did not like that system, mostly because I
did not do well with it as a player. I think this is a common reaction
for a lot of badminton players, to fear change based on how it could
affect them personally.

It is important for current badminton fans to realize that the general
public views our sport much differently than us hardcore fans. It can
take quite a while for anything exciting to happen in the 3*15 scoring
system, and often games can drag on for quite a long time. Now for us
hardcore fans this is fine, because we can appreciate the game’s finer
points, but for someone who does not know the game well they will
probably lose interest.

In April I went down to North Carolina to shoot some video of a
badminton exhibition between Mike Beres and Will Milroy, the Canadian
mens doubles champions, and Tony Gunawan and Howard Bach, the World
mens doubles champions. We traveled to numerous schools showcasing
these extremely talented players, and as you’ll eventually see once
the video project is complete, the students were going absolutely
crazy. However, as the organizer attempted to explain to the kids
about the 3*15 scoring system, which was used at these exhibitions, I
could tell that a lot of them were not getting it. I think that this
is typical of the general public. It is not that they cannot figure it
out, but rather they cannot be bothered to figure it out. Some of you
may argue that tennis has a complicated scoring system with 15-30-40-
Deuce, but essentially this means 1-2-3-4 and you have to win by two
points. I think that a simplified scoring system will definitely work
in badminton’s favour, especially in terms of being television
friendly. I particularly like the break at 11 points.

My next experience that steered me in favour of the 3*21 scoring
system was my trip to Tokyo for the Thomas and Uber Cups. It seemed
like every other game players were going into extra points at 20 all.
In the first mens doubles between Denmark and Malaysia Jens Eriksen
and Martin Lundgaard Hansen won the second game of their match against
Koo Kien Keat and Chan Chong Ming 30-28. Also, there were no 90 minute
matches to slow down the ties. There was somewhat disappointing
attendance after both the Japanese teams were eliminated, which is
understandable considering each tie can take a few hours, and why
would you want to watch once your team is gone? Now just imagine if it
took twice as long to complete a tie, even fewer people would show up.
After watching this tournament I was a complete convert in favour of
the 3*21 scoring system.

At the IBF’s annual general meeting also in Tokyo that same week, the
IBF voted unanimously in favour of the 3*21 scoring system. Not one
nation stood opposed to the scoring system. I know that a number of
players are still critical of the change, but I think that is in large
part because they have the most to lose from it. Any benefits that
badminton sees from an economic perspective will likely not affect our
current generation of badminton stars very much, but if a player
starts to struggle to compete because of this new system they could
stand to lose their place on their respective national team.

While I am in favour of the new scoring system, I do not think it is
perfect. There are some valid concerns for doubles. With the rally
point system there is a lot of pressure on the doubles server not to
make an error, while at the same time they have to worry about hitting
a serve well enough not to get killed. I think that by removing the
back service line, and allowing doubles pairs to serve the full length
of the court you would remove a lot of the pressure that is put on the
serve. You could have doubles pairs serving like singles players. I
also think that 5*11 with 60 second mandatory breaks at 6 points would
have worked as well. This would have worked better for television I
think, but perhaps we should just stick with 3*21 now to avoid rocking
the boat anymore.