The one reason that I did not make any letter to BWF is because I haven't heard anything from the athlete commission. That is why in my last post I mentioned the athlete commission. And that is a good idea from you to try to contact the Chair. However, if I as the audience feel that the quality of the tournaments decreases by mid next year because of the rules, e.g. too many early upsets, poor performance by big players, many injuries occuring, many last minute withdrawal, I will also make a letter to either bwf or commission. For me, that is something that I want to confirm first, before I sending a message to bwf. And of course knowing the dynamic inside and around the commission will also help in this matter, that is why I mentioned that I did not know how the system there works. Do you have any result of the council meeting though? I will be really glad to check it.
Nothing much that I heard, but the good news is about the points used for BWF World Tour Finals will be made similar as World Championships. That become the answer of which tournaments included for calculation. As the name BWF World Tours contain 6 levels, all 6 levels would be used for World Tour Finals qualification ranking.
I can't remember the points system for each of the levels but this is a good move provided the points distribution at each level is fair (pretty contentious). Some associations will not support players for the top level tournaments as independent players. But I would like to see players who play more (and win at level 3/4 tournaments) being able to move into top fifteen. Those who play few level 2/3 tournaments drop down accordingly.
These are actually 2 points that are not very correlated to each other Cheung, but I agree with both points with some notes at the second. On the side not, I think level 3/4 tournaments are the place for players at about ranked 4-10 to win the title actually. So it wouldn't make much sense to hope for these people to reach top 15 because of the wins, of course if we talk about the same 'win' here. If you refer to them who often reach SF of QF in level 3/4 tournaments, I still believe they will be the players at around WR 8-17. What do you think on this point? Anyway, one thing that I have to bring up is the number of matches played in a tournaments. Some of us argued that 'those who play few level 2/3 tournaments drop down accordingly'. I generally agree with the point that the more consistent players, should be awarded better than the inconsistent one. But I think we actually have to use the base to compare them at the same number of matches, instead of number of tournaments participated. Axelsen/Srikanth may only participated 7 tournaments, but if they always reached SF, that is 28 matches already in a year. While CTC may reached QF consistently in 10 tournaments, but that is still 'only' 30 matches even with considerably 3 extra tournaments. I generally don't agree with the mandatory number of tournaments next year (12) because of this disparity. As we know, the likes of CTC/SWH usually do about 17-18 tournaments a year with many resulted at SF/QF and the number includes team + world/continental events. This means, they play about all of SS, all 12. However, the higher ranked (top 3 or top 5 so to speak), may often reaches the final (lets say Srikanth). He played about 1 or 2 more matches each tournament and for me, it is not fair to force them to play more tournaments to have more matches than CTC/SWH. So basically, I am in for them to not play 12 SS, maybe about 9-10 mandatory ones should do. This lower boundary limit gives enough flexibility for top players to adjust their number of match played to have about the same number of total matches in a year
if you make it that low you may as well not have a minimum. they'll need more points from more tournaments to maintain their ranking. which brings us back to my point... there is no minimum nec'y. if you want to be #1 you gotta play. if you want to qualify for og & wc you gotta play. if you want to make $ you gotta play. make sense?
This one is a bit contentious. Players could earn more from a few hours coaching than going to a tournament
yes, but coaching instead of playing the circuit during their prime? most would get bored out of their mind.
well then, they shouldn't have to play if they have enough points to stay in the lead. they earned it. right now tty & kevin/marcus have a huge lead over #2. what's to stop them from showing up & losing on purpose in round 1 so they can get more rest and not increase the chance of injury. bwf has taken control over your physical well being. the mandatory quota also makes the protected ranking clause ripe for abuse...
that's where the 'responsibility to BWF' kicks in. The deserve it, and they still have responsibility to help bwf promote badminton and help increase the popularity of the lower tournament as well. You deserve the point does not mean you don't have responsibility anymore to other party. We get back to the initial point here.
now there's a potential dilemma w/ kento momota. he may not make the japan nat'l 'a' team & be supported for wt 2.4 through wt 2.2 level tourneys. however, it's very possible he may crack the top 15 from finishing 1st or 2nd in multiple wt 2.5's. what if the nba will not sign his paperwork for entry in 2.4's & higher what do you do, bwf? fine the nba? you cannot force a federation to support a player. fine momota? you cannot penalize a player who has no control over the rules you wrote, which makes it impossible for him to comply. i actually hope momota takes this route if only to show bwf the error of their ways. [i would expect the nba to welcome him back to the 'a' team if this happens, so bwf is let off the hook and maintains 'control' over the athletes... ]
2017 participations : • Zhang Beiwen : 5 SSP + 5 SS • Michele Li : 3 SSP + 5 SS • Hendra/Boon Heong : 5 SSP + 7 SS The perfect shots by Hendra Setiawan/Tan Boon Heong performing in all Superseries for 2017. YES, 12 tournaments the capability of the independent players (reach the maximum is their limit). BWF do care of all players. More sponsors will do care as well. Being top players (Top 10/15) always attracts more sponsors too. How could a good players/pairs cannot finding the sponsors for them? Those accusation is questionable. Could you prove it? If you know it and have a proof BUT doesn't want to make a report. It means you're participate in helping and engaging in it. I think you wouldn't explain it at all since you're look like enjoying that conflict condition BWF will give a fine to NBA if there any rules violation. The registration of players always through their National Association. Once a National Association registered their players (national team or individual players/independent players), they know the consequences afterward. It's not a dilemma for BWF or NBA in the case of Momota. The dilemma happened in Momota his self or his fans. Nothing to do. BWF will not ask NBA to change their rules. It doesn't stand against BWF rules either. Let's make clear here that BWF is not a federation of badminton players. BWF is a federation of National Badminton federations/associations.
now calculate their earnings from those and subtract the cost of their training and air/food/lodging for them & their coaches. don't forget to consider potential medical expenses. not completely. if they care so much why do they give 100% control to the nat'l associations? badminton is an individual sport. why do they refuse to let players enter independently? it completely depends what country you're from. do you think if the goat played for usa/canada/peru/jamaica/any of the pan-am countries they'd make as much as lin dan? you'd be in for a rude awakening. they would still need a 2nd job. yes, i lived it. report to who, exactly? bwf? they already know what's going on. they created the system. my sole motive for participation is to give the player's an opportunity to compete. i'm in no position to do anything else. if the worldwide fan base does not volunteer to help out there would be a lot less tournaments for the athlete's to play in, and the fans to watch. i'm certainly not going to type a 100,000 word essay detailing my worldwide resume in all aspects of badminton spanning 30+ years. that won't change anything. sometimes i'll express the motives/processes/agendas of what goes on behind the scenes because i think some bc'ers would find it interesting as an additional point of view. the majority of discussion here is one dimensional, from a fans point of view. i am certainly not knocking the members here because i am one of you, and this place was created by a fan's love & passion for the game (& pics!). i just happen to be a fan whose path wove its way in, out and through all aspects & levels of this sport. i consider myself lucky in that respect. as far as 'enjoying that conflict condition' i separate my 2 personas... if i'm watching a tournament i'm enjoying the action and cheering on my fave's if i'm financing and/or directing a tournament i'm 99% business. you cannot run an efficient tournament with professionalism from a fan's point of view. it quickly becomes a cluster f*ck. all i can say, master, is give it a try. get together w/ your domestic federation & bwf and volunteer to run a sanctioned tournament. you'll learn who is paying for what. put your ass on the line then report your experiences here. i can't wait to hear them.
maybe i wasn't clear... nba only enters their players in wt 2.4, 2.3, 2.2 & 2.1 tournaments if they are on the 'a' team, not the 'b' team. what if momota is only on the 'b' team, but his bwf ranking is in the top 15 so bwf requires he enters? you get that so far, right? so, what if nba sticks to their 'no b team' rule and does not enter momota in the required tournaments? who will be required to pay the fine? can you see how it is out of momota's control? (he would be willing to play but nba won't enter him) ...that clearly gives complete control over a players career to said federations/associations. stated another way: ...that affords a player zero control over their own badminton career.
You forget their sponsorships. I explained it briefly and clearly above. 1. The A Team sent to Level 4 or above, stated in NBA Regulation. But it doesn't close any doors to sent B Team to Level 4. 2. In the case Momota is B Team member, and his ranking in Top 15 and get in obligation zone to play, it's on NBA's decision whether to send Momota or not. 3. If NBA stick to the rule, NBA knows the concequences. About the NBA rules, you may read here and here. 4. If any fine given, it should be directly to NBA. NBA would pay the fine from BWF. 5. If Momota as B Team member want to play in Level 4 or above, he need to have a permission from NBA. There have been an example where NBA give permission for Team B member to join 6 SS tournaments. But again, it's regulation mention the team A member get the privileges to play in SS tournaments and team B member should asking a recommendation from NBA first. So, there will be no problem if that happen. Momota and NBA have their responsibility and know the rules. The latest news is Momota selected as Team A member.
you forget not all independent players have sponsors. if they do you do not know the amount. a relief. now we can cease all speculation. yay!
We are talking about Top 15/10 players/pairs. My question is why couldn't a good player/pair get sponsors for themselves? If you think the amount of the sponsorships is not enough, how can some player get enough sponsorship while other couldn't at all? All these things have been out of the topic of mandatory commitments. Your issue about the fear of an example independent players (including same names) have been answered very well within their participation in a whole 2017 year. Those are not their fear, even without any obligation (e.g Hendra/Boon Heong and Michele Li are currently out of Top 10/15). Only Zhang Beiwen is the player Top 15. My concern is while they're good player (it mean players with good skills and spirits), it doesn't matter with the mandatory commitment given by BWF. The mandatory commitment doesn't force the players to stay on court 7 days in a week and 4 weeks in row in a month, or even full 3 months in a row without any breaks to take a breath in between their tour journey. Mandatory commitment giving a protection into a certainty, especially in the top level tournaments. 4 of 7 Level 4 tournaments is a logical amount. 3 of 3 Level 2 and 5 of 5 Level 3 is either. If you remove those mandatory commitment, how could you maintain the high level tournament in their high competitiveness and high attractions to their fans? Within the current mandatory is 9 tournaments minimum (5 + 4), some tournaments have being considered with low participation (eg. China SSP, Korea SS, Australia SS). How to cope that problems? Their mandatory commitments also a part of players' willingness to help badminton reaching a broader coverage of fans and countries. Inside their commitment, players give their autographs, do meet and greet with their fans, giving some interviews in which then broadcasted in some television, news media, and spread-out to all over badminton fans. You bring the issue "mandatory commitment" is required or not, without considering any negative impacts when it removed.
For the third and last time... It depends on which country you live in. I think you're the only one who doesn't get it. start at the beginning of this thread. my opinions are clearly stated. carry on...
For so long time China SSP still be the lowest competitive among others SSP. How about that? So, do you think with all those obstacles to run a tournament, still no need a mandatory commitment which is that mandatory commitment will help you running a larger income with more tickets bought by the fans.
