Originally posted on personal blog on 6 September, 2008 at 5.00 pm (Uncategorized)
to me, there are two ways you can play badminton, depending on your objective. if your objective is to win, you play with a net, with lines distinctly drawn and to be strictly followed. you achieve your goal when you have the higher score; to do this you have to be aware of your opponent’s weaknesses so that you may turn them to your own use. you have to be conscious of your own weaknesses as well, ensuring that your opponent does not use them against you. when you hit the shuttlecock, you try to do it in such a way that makes it as difficult as possible for your opponent to reach it. it is in your favour if you can hit the shuttlecock as near to the lines as possible but without exceeding them. besides how well you attack your opponent’s weaknesses while covering up your own, it is also about how long you can maintain your form in the game. therefore, it is greatly to your advantage if you manage to cause your opponent to be injured, e.g. a sprained ankle.
it is completely different if your objective is not to win, but to keep the shuttlecock in the air for as long as possible, be it so that you may get a good work-out with your partner, or enjoy a longer game. in this scenario there is no need for nets or clearly-demarcated lines; whoever can reach the shuttlecock will lift it into the air with his racquet. you would concentrate on using your strengths to cover your partner’s weaknesses, or playing in such a way as to complement your partner’s strengths. the shuttlecock would be a gift whose final destination is your partner. in working together to keep the shuttlecock in the air, the game becomes a dance; not a demonstration of individual skill, but the combination of strengths to achieve a shared purpose. in a way, you are no longer hitting in opposite directions; not against each other, but at and with each other.
I prefer the second way. which one do you?
"There are two kinds of people in the world: Givers and Takers. The takers may eat better, but the givers sleep better." - Unknown