Why badminton, without stats obsession as yet, is more interesting than cricket | Badminton News

On the positive side, it is a relief that the tyranny of data and numbers doesn’t blight the watching of badminton. Yet.For, all sports smothered statics eventually degenerate into dumb debates of who’s a better player, fan wars, jingoic jousts and retro-fitted bending figures to suit assorted fanaticisms. Not many can let go of their pet theories and cleanse the palate for the next faceoff, keeping sport fresh and full of surprises, if tethered to stats from the past.
Thank god for Tai Tzu Ying who can come back from any match situation. And for Kidambi Srikanth whose (undoubtedly) terrible numbers just cannot strangle the possibility of an unlikely win. Or for Satwik-Chirag who can keep straight faces when 14-20 down and bin all statical probabilities for a rollicking 22-20 run. Yet next time not end on the good side of fun.
It’s different to summon stats for coaching teams to plot and work on shuttlers’ weaknesses. But it is debatable if fan experience is enhanced win-loss data, aside of buffing up biases of confirmation. Some stats are truly eye-popping. Is it equally enjoyable admiring it for pure action-reaction of rallies and elegance of movements, without getting saturated piecharts, bar graphs and dull ponderous tweezed out numbers?

While badminton has its matchups and head-to-head figures, a Carolina Marin – PV Sindhu match is still a firecracker owing to their personalities, context of past faceoffs and a faint veneer of frenemy speculations. It’s a mildly interesting stat that in their 16 faceoffs since 2011, only once has a match gone onto a 21-19 scoreline in the last set, i.e. gotten close. And Sindhu nicked that one.
Marin’s mind is known to be indestructible, though she was 20-18 up in the first here before going down 20-22, 19-21. And within two months of that Malaysia quarters loss in 2018, she would pick her last of three World Championship crowns, in rampaging fashion shredding Sindhu 21-19, 21-10 in the forgettable Nanjing finals for the Indian.
But for whatever reasons, a badminton stat just cannot encompass the entire tale. With a long season, noone goes full throttle everywhere. There’s always that one odd match perhaps earlier in the season, when she was yet to peak for a big tournament, when she was taking a breather the week after a title run or when conditions finally got to her which mocks at assembling her avenging numbers.
The sport though, has great potential for highly specific and individualised EQ metrics, rather than some consolidated career calibrator and milestone miner like boring cricket does.
The number of deep tosses Jonatan Chrie can chase down at his far forehand corner, before going for a straight kill. The percentage of shuttles Prannoy takes round the head vs on his backhand. At what spot on the racquet head exactly does Kunlavut Vitidsarn strike, to dinguish between his defense and attack. Just how tight are low retrieves at the net, of Chen Yufei compared to An Se Young. How often does PV Sindhu vary her pace on strokes within an exchange and take charge of the rally, without getting pulled into a pattern dictated opponents.

Crucial to India’s Olympic medal hopes: how many shots does Lakshya Sen defend, without hurrying up to transition into attack-mode, lengthening the rally unnecessarily. And percentage of winners from Satwik and Chirag, when both are retreating, pushed back deep drives.
Hawkeye can happily furnish the cliched court maps. But it’s the player-schtick that can set badminton apart from other statical bores.
If badminton has to geek out inevitably, may it geek out royally – throw up a 3D geo-pathway of where on court Tai Tzu Ying toys around with her scurrying rivals. Or connect visible forehead popping veins with smash speeds of a roaring Viktor Axelsen. Or heart rates of Shi Yuqi, Prannoy or Lakshya Sen corresponding with one of their cheeky variations. Or serotonin levels of Akane Yamaguchi after she wins a world title, but goes about her life as if nothing much happened. That last one is a joke.
It would be catty to find out the comparative decibels on a Marin and a Se Young roar, though girls raising hell on a badminton court ought to be encouraged and not tamped down. But a stat on the effect of all of Marin’s mental games on pulse rates of Bing Jiao, Sindhu and Tzu Ying could be wickedly awesome to know for so much of badminton is about being inscrutable and revealing nothing.
Badminton turns into an entirely different battle at 17-all nerve-shredding juncture. ‘Mentality monster’ is a vague descriptor at the moment. But if badminton must drown in devilish data and join the stat-satans who render it mathematical, then it might as well tell us what makes a mentality monster. With proper endgame numbers of who wilts and who wows.