Will wipe off few players, benefit few others: Gopichand on badminton’s new scoring system

Pullela Gopichand says badminton’s new 15-point scoring system will significantly reshape the sport, benefiting some players while sidelining others. He questioned BWF’s rationale, highlighted tactical changes, backed veterans adapting, and stressed India lacks a clear succession plan in men’s doubles

New Delhi: Pullela Gopichand still remembers the disruption caused by badminton’s scoring overhaul during his playing career and as the sport gears up to embrace another “tactical shift”, the India coach believes a few players will be “wiped off”.

The 15×3 system (three games of 15 points each) will replace the current 21×3 format (three games of 21 points each) next year. The BWF said the shorter format would help in managing player workload in a crowded calendar.

---

Gopichand recalled how he had won the All England title in 2001 under the traditional 15-point format before badminton briefly switched to the 7×5 scoring system.

The experiment was abandoned within a year, with the sport reverting to the traditional 15-point scores for men and 11-point scores for women at that time.

“When I won the All England, a few months later they moved from 15 to 7. It took me time because I was one of those players who was a stroke player. I wanted time to get adjusted. It took me a year to come back,” Gopichand said in response to a PTI query during an interaction here ahead of the World Championships.

“And then by the time I was kind of settling in, they brought us back to the long form and it was a death blow. Because you train, you detrain, and your endurance drops. Then to go back and play 15 was impossible. These definitely make a big impact. A few players, it will wipe off, a few players might benefit.” Drawing parallels with the 15×3 system approved by the Badminton World Federation (BWF), Gopichand said the shorter format would place greater premium on speed, power and mental strength, particularly during the closing stages of the games.

“You scoring points will be important, but you not giving away points will be even more important. The speed and the power and the focus need to be top notch. The mind will play much more,” he said.

According to the national coach, doubles players are likely to feel the biggest impact as shorter games will make every phase of the contest more critical.

“The serve, serve-return and the attack will be even more fierce in the doubles game…people who can hold their nerves and play the strokes will be important,” he said.

“In singles, already you can see a bunch of youngsters playing that whether it’s people like Alwi Farhan (Indonesia), Christo Popov (France). I think a lot of flat doubles kind of a game is what’s being played. So I think that will be a few more players might end up coming like that.

“The crucial points in the game will be the 11th and 12th points. How you take pressure at 13-14 or 15-14 will become very important. There will be a lot of pressure points throughout the match.” Gopichand felt the change could alter the character of the sport, with the format favouring flatter, faster exchanges over the more elaborate, stroke-heavy rallies a longer format allowed.

“Players will try to be a lot safer and not too much of skills. That’s one area which I think the sport will miss out on because a longer format typically gives you a little more freedom to open up your arms and play a few more strokes. Here it’s going to be a lot more flat, parallel games,” he said.

Not convinced by BWF’s logic

Gopichand also felt the BWF could have achieved its objective of reducing player workload differently.

“If they were planning to extend the tournament schedule to two weeks, they could have stayed on with the 21-point system because it doesn’t make sense to shorten it and lengthen the tournament both at the same time,” he said.

“The purpose was to give rest to the players, and that could have been achieved by having the tournament over a 10-12-day period instead of six days. But probably BWF has its own reasons. It’s very subjective.” Gopichand believes veteran Indian players such as HS Prannoy and Kidambi Srikanth might benefit from the new scoring system.

“It will be better for them. We’re not very sure how exactly because when speed goes up these guys have to move quicker. So training to move quicker needs you to be a lot more agile, a lot more faster and that could lead to injuries as well.

“The nuance is everything. The smaller detail is everything. If I had a choice I would pick the 15 for an older player… For some players it might be a little tough, but by and large Indian players are okay.”

Who after Satwik-Chirag?

Gopichand has admitted India does not yet have a clear answer to who fill the men’s doubles void once Satwiksairaj Rankireddy and Chirag Shetty move past their peak.

Asked how India plans to build a supply chain in men’s doubles beyond its top pair, Gopichand did not offer a ready roadmap.

“It’s a very valid question. I think we need to get the best players coming together, playing together, some system like that needs to be there. We are very democratic in that set-up.

“We used to have five academies, or four academies, five years back. Today there are 500 academies — 5,000 independent players and 5,000 independent minds. When it comes to doubles, that compounds the problem,” he said.

He acknowledged that very few players, who consider themselves strong in singles, are willing to experiment in doubles.

“Very rarely do we have a decent singles player pick doubles if he is good at it. Not very often do you see that switch…it could be good talent for singles but exceptional talent for doubles.”