Satwik’s scoring idea gets an unlikely endorsement — from arch rival Weikeng
Two players who could face each other in the Thomas Cup this week are on the same side of the 15x3 debate. When rivals agree, it's worth paying attention.
When arch rivals agree, it’s worth paying attention.
Liang Weikeng, who could line up on the opposite side of the net from Satwiksairaj Rankireddy in Wednesday’s Thomas Cup group tie, told China’s CCTV on Monday that he was in favour of Satwik’s nuanced idea — using the 21×3 format for the five Super 1000s, and sticking to 15×3 for the lower tournaments, Super 750 downwards. Not unlike tennis, where Grand Slams are played over five sets while ATP Tour events are decided over three.
Satwik had told BWF in January — a video Weikeng came across only over the weekend — that “21 is good enough in the Super 1000 because from next year it will be two-week-long tournaments with a break in between. So it will be good enough. But in the lower tournaments — the 500s, 300s — the 15×3 is good so our bodies can recover.”
The BWF had announced recently that Super 1000s at China, Indonesia, Malaysia, All England and Denmark would run over 11 days instead of the current six, with a day’s break between matches.
Weikeng, one of China’s top men’s doubles shuttlers, echoed the logic precisely. “I watched an interview yesterday from Rankireddy about combining 15 and 21 points. I think it’s pretty good because next year Super 1000 will extend to 11 days — you play one day and then rest a day, so you have sufficient time to recover. But if it’s 15 points, basically someone who flew from far away for a match that only lasts 20 minutes or so… it will test the players’ form and reorganisation more. So if the Super 1000 can retain 21 points, while tournaments that usually last five or six days use 15 points, it might be better.”
That two rivals — one Indian, one Chinese, potentially facing each other days after this conversation — are aligned on this speaks to how widely shared the concern is among doubles players.
Jia Yifan, the four-time women’s doubles World champion and 2024 Olympic champion, perhaps put the broader debate in perspective best. Asked by BWF about the 15×3 system back in January, she delivered a gem, not unlike her scathing smash: “I think people who enjoy badminton will watch it even if it’s to 30 points or in any other format. But if someone isn’t interested, even if it’s a 1-point game, they probably still wouldn’t watch.” She chuckled. She wasn’t resisting change. She was simply self-assured about the popularity of her sport. “It’s worth seeing some changes, but there’s already plenty of people who love badminton just as it is,” she added.
The doubles world, broadly, isn’t resisting either. But it is bracing.
China’s reigning mixed doubles Olympic champion Huang Dong Ping told BWF: “We have actually tried this system in our club league. We felt the matches were a bit too short and could end very quickly. There was a higher level of unpredictability. So overall we still prefer the 21-point system.”
The reigning GOAT of doubles, Korea’s versatile Seo Seung-jae, was more precise about the specific concern. “It will get more fun as the matches get tighter. However, men’s doubles is already quite tight. So it would reduce chances to flip the match. And with reduced play time it might give the audience the impression that matches end virtually very quickly — and that’s concerning.”
China’s dominant women’s doubles pairing of Tan Ning and Liu Shengshu, who have infused their event with attacking aggression, ought to theoretically thrive in a system that rewards early pressure. Yet even they are adjusting their thinking. “The 15-point system will have a lower margin for error,” Shengshu told CCTV. “We’ve made mistakes where we’ve fallen behind before reaching 15 points, which led to us losing the first game. We might need to focus on finer techniques in serving and receiving and how to showcase our attack from the start.” Tan Ning, she added, is a slow starter while she herself gets into form quickly — something they will have to address in the next six months.
The excessive focus on serve-receiving is a thread running through the doubles community’s concerns — an acknowledgment that 15×3 shifts the weight of the game toward the start of each set in a way that fundamentally alters its rhythm.
Interestingly, the BWF hasn’t completely erased 21 points from the system starting January 4, 2027. In the key changes published officially, the first nine points outline how 15×3 will work. The tenth, however, is worded carefully: “3×15 becomes the standard scoring system, while 3×21 is retained as an alternate scoring option.” A door left ajar — for domestic tournaments, for now.
Why fix what isn’t broken seemed to be the refrain of the world’s best doubles players. But the system has been voted in overwhelmingly, and they will adapt. What’s striking is that in doing so, it has brought together leading voices from India and China — and in Satwik and Weikeng, two rivals who might have been better placed exchanging smashes than agreeing on scoring policy.
When arch rivals agree, it’s worth paying attention.
Liang Weikeng, who could line up on the opposite side of the net from Satwiksairaj Rankireddy in Wednesday’s Thomas Cup group tie, told China’s CCTV on Monday that he was in favour of Satwik’s nuanced idea — using the 21×3 format for the five Super 1000s, and sticking to 15×3 for the lower tournaments, Super 750 downwards. Not unlike tennis, where Grand Slams are played over five sets while ATP Tour events are decided over three.
Satwik had told BWF in January — a video Weikeng came across only over the weekend — that “21 is good enough in the Super 1000 because from next year it will be two-week-long tournaments with a break in between. So it will be good enough. But in the lower tournaments — the 500s, 300s — the 15×3 is good so our bodies can recover.”
The BWF had announced recently that Super 1000s at China, Indonesia, Malaysia, All England and Denmark would run over 11 days instead of the current six, with a day’s break between matches.
Weikeng, one of China’s top men’s doubles shuttlers, echoed the logic precisely. “I watched an interview yesterday from Rankireddy about combining 15 and 21 points. I think it’s pretty good because next year Super 1000 will extend to 11 days — you play one day and then rest a day, so you have sufficient time to recover. But if it’s 15 points, basically someone who flew from far away for a match that only lasts 20 minutes or so… it will test the players’ form and reorganisation more. So if the Super 1000 can retain 21 points, while tournaments that usually last five or six days use 15 points, it might be better.”
That two rivals — one Indian, one Chinese, potentially facing each other days after this conversation — are aligned on this speaks to how widely shared the concern is among doubles players.
Jia Yifan, the four-time women’s doubles World champion and 2024 Olympic champion, perhaps put the broader debate in perspective best. Asked by BWF about the 15×3 system back in January, she delivered a gem, not unlike her scathing smash: “I think people who enjoy badminton will watch it even if it’s to 30 points or in any other format. But if someone isn’t interested, even if it’s a 1-point game, they probably still wouldn’t watch.” She chuckled. She wasn’t resisting change. She was simply self-assured about the popularity of her sport. “It’s worth seeing some changes, but there’s already plenty of people who love badminton just as it is,” she added.
The doubles world, broadly, isn’t resisting either. But it is bracing.
China’s reigning mixed doubles Olympic champion Huang Dong Ping told BWF: “We have actually tried this system in our club league. We felt the matches were a bit too short and could end very quickly. There was a higher level of unpredictability. So overall we still prefer the 21-point system.”
The reigning GOAT of doubles, Korea’s versatile Seo Seung-jae, was more precise about the specific concern. “It will get more fun as the matches get tighter. However, men’s doubles is already quite tight. So it would reduce chances to flip the match. And with reduced play time it might give the audience the impression that matches end virtually very quickly — and that’s concerning.”
China’s dominant women’s doubles pairing of Tan Ning and Liu Shengshu, who have infused their event with attacking aggression, ought to theoretically thrive in a system that rewards early pressure. Yet even they are adjusting their thinking. “The 15-point system will have a lower margin for error,” Shengshu told CCTV. “We’ve made mistakes where we’ve fallen behind before reaching 15 points, which led to us losing the first game. We might need to focus on finer techniques in serving and receiving and how to showcase our attack from the start.” Tan Ning, she added, is a slow starter while she herself gets into form quickly — something they will have to address in the next six months.
The excessive focus on serve-receiving is a thread running through the doubles community’s concerns — an acknowledgment that 15×3 shifts the weight of the game toward the start of each set in a way that fundamentally alters its rhythm.
Interestingly, the BWF hasn’t completely erased 21 points from the system starting January 4, 2027. In the key changes published officially, the first nine points outline how 15×3 will work. The tenth, however, is worded carefully: “3×15 becomes the standard scoring system, while 3×21 is retained as an alternate scoring option.” A door left ajar — for domestic tournaments, for now.
Why fix what isn’t broken seemed to be the refrain of the world’s best doubles players. But the system has been voted in overwhelmingly, and they will adapt. What’s striking is that in doing so, it has brought together leading voices from India and China — and in Satwik and Weikeng, two rivals who might have been better placed exchanging smashes than agreeing on scoring policy.
