Abstract
LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in English; abstract also in Chinese. This study compared the physiological responses and shot selection preferences of male singles players between thenew (rally-point) and old (scoring-by-service) scoring systems. Ten male athletes each played two matches against the same opponent on different days using the lottery method. Matches were notated using a systematic observation instrument, and physiological data were measured using heart rate (HR), ratings of perceived exertion (RPE) and blood lactate levels (LA). Results showed no differences in peak HR, RPE or LA responses between the two systems. However, players spent more time at an HR greater than 90%HRpeak under the old system (63%) than under the new system (54%). Notational analysis demonstrated a significant decrease in total match playing time (PT: 29 min), work time (10 min), work density (0.57), rest time (18 min), effective playing time (36%), number of rallies (203) and serves (35) under the new system as compared to the old system (e.g. PT: 42 min). No significant differences were noted between the two systems for number of shots, rally time, stroke time, frequency distribution of shot selection and positions during the matches, and for shot methods on the last shot of each rally. These findings suggest that the new system can significantly shorten PT compared to the old system, and that physiological responses, shot selection and positions do not affect between the systems. Meanwhile, the greater proportion of time spent at higher HR intensities under the old system may be attributed to the longer playing time with the opponent. 本研究目的，針對「新(落地得分)、舊制(發球得分)羽球單打比賽時之生理反應和擊球方式」做比較。以羽球正式比賽抽籤方式讓10位大學男子甲組羽球選手，決定其各二場新、舊制羽球單打比賽同一位對手之方式。以高速攝影機拍攝每場比賽做為系統性觀察法之內容分析，並在每場比賽時測驗心跳率 (HR)、運動自覺量表(RPE)和血乳酸濃度 (LA)做為生理反應的評估指標。結果顯示，羽球新、舊制比賽間引起心跳率峰值 (HRpeak)、RPE或血乳酸上升的反應並無統計差異。然而，舊制比賽時>90%HRpeak強度的比率(63%)明顯比新制 (54%)來得多。新制比賽的整場比賽完成時間 (PT：29分鐘)、淨比賽時間 (10分鐘)、運動密度 (0.57)、休息時間 (18分鐘)、比賽時間效益 (36%)、每球來回完成次數 (203)及發球次數 (35)都明顯比舊制 (例 如PT：42分鐘)縮短，但二種不同比賽間在揮拍次數、每球來回完成時間、擊球時間、擊球方式、擊球位置及每球最後一拍的擊球方式均無統計差異。這些結果顯示，新賽制規則改變會比舊賽制明顯縮短比賽時間，但不同賽制間所引起的生理反應、擊球方式及位置則不因規則改變而受到影響。此外，舊賽制比新賽制出現較高心跳率分佈情形，可歸因於舊制比賽之雙方選手有較多對抗機會或較長比賽時間所造成的。
Highlights
Badminton is a fast and dynamic sport that requires a balance of physiological preparation and tactical exercise (Downey, 1982; Pearce, 2002)
This study was to test the hypothesis that the introduction of the 3 x 21 scoring system by the International Badminton Federation (IBF) would make badminton matches shorter, faster or more physiologically demanding than the 3 x 15 system, and would affect shot selection during the matches
The results of this study confirmed that the playing time, work time, rest time, effective playing time, number of rallies and serves, and work density of matches played under the new system were significantly smaller than under the old system (Tables 2 & 3), the new and old systems resulted in similar physiological responses (Table 1), frequency distribution of shot selection (Figure 3a) and positions during the matches (Figure 3b), as well a similar frequency distribution of shot methods of the last shot per rally (Figure 3c)
Summary
Badminton is a fast and dynamic sport that requires a balance of physiological preparation and tactical exercise (Downey, 1982; Pearce, 2002). In 2006, the scoring system in badminton was changed from the traditional 3 innings to 15 points (i.e., scoring-by-service) system (with the exception of women’s singles, which used the 3 games to 11 points system), to the new 3 innings to 21 points (i.e., rally-point scoring) system for all disciplines. Since the aforementioned study (Chen & Chen, 2008) did not include the physiological and shot selection parameters of badminton matches under the two systems, it is not known whether physiological demand and shot selection would be affected by the shorter playing time under the new system as compared to the old system
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: Asian Journal of Physical Education & Recreation
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
