In my playing years (mainly the 80's) I consider that I was one of the players that used the most deception during competitive play. It won me many matches which I might not other otherwise have won and hence consider is a useful and necessary part of a players 'shot bank'.

Deception is just as valid as a smash, a clear, a serve or any other shot. It gives an extra edge, it produces a millisecond of breathing space in which to prepare for the winner. Other prominent names using deception include Mike Tredgett, Duncan Bridge and Elo Hansen. Many top players of the past and present are capable of many weird and wonderful trick shots but most choose not to execute them in matches.

Probably the most recent new deceptive shot was seen executed by Peter Gade in the final of the Copenhagen Masters. This was a complicated net shot which resulted in a pure winner at match point. This did not happen out of the blue and many training sessions contained this shot under development just as any other shot might be.

The current English players I have seen do not use deception with any degree of success. I have no idea if it is against the current methodology of training in the England camp but if this is true then I would urge a positive attempt to put deception into the curriculum. I have been asked over the years, by many who have seen me play, to teach them to be deceptive. This is a difficult one since being deceptive is as much 'gaining an appreciation' as the actual production of the shot - but here is my attempt at an overview.

I use the example of some of the worlds best players such as Peter Gade and Camilla Martin who for the last few years have trained and played for Gentofte Badminton Club.

What is deception?

The question 'What is deception?' - can be answered in many ways. I have seen the answer described by several writers amongst which the most complete review was given by Jake Downey. (Winning Badminton Doubles, Pages 207-210) Here is a short and fairly bland offering of my own which needs further explanation:-

Any action taken by a player which causes uncertainty in the opponent.

The general concept of deception is that you are trying to make the opponent unsure of what is happening. Ideally he will not be able to reach the next shot (i.e he will be aced) but more usually the end result is that the opponent will be forced to take the shuttle later than he would have liked to do.

A flick serve is an example of deception. A good flick serve will result in the opponent not being to attack the serve but instead will have to clear to the baseline or drop to the net. I usually split deception into two broad categories termed 'positive' and 'negative' defined as follows:-

Positive deception is an action taken by a player which results in the shuttle being hit at the first possible moment.

Negative deception is an action taken by a player which results in the shuttle being struck later than the first possible moment.

Lets think about some examples. Consider a player coming into the net on the forehand side. He is able to take the shuttle at net height but decides to let the shuttle drop and play it across the net from a point below the net. This is very often a winning shot due to the surprise of the action but the shuttle has been struck at a point lower than was otherwise possible. Very often this requires the racket being taken away from the shuttle before it comes forward once more. This is negative deception.

Consider a player receiving a low doubles serve. If the serve is good is cannot be really attacked but instead the receiver can brush the racket from right to left whilst pronating the wrist from left to right. (considering a right handed player). The aim of this is to fool the servers partner into a small but useful uncertainty in the direction of the shuttle. This I term positive deception since the shuttle is still hit at the earliest possible moment. (think about it - the direction of the motion of the shaft of the racket does not have to determine the direction of the shuttle after being struck).

Is there a place for deception in modern badminton?

The main thrust of badminton coaching these days is put into fitness, hitting hard and moving fast. Now whilst these are noble targets, recent results by Europeans suggest that few manage to compete against the Asian player with any real degree of success by simply trying the approach of 'bash it hard'.

Most of the time the Asian player moves which such speed that at best the European is on the end of a piece of string trying his best to get the next shuttle back. This is not going to be an optimal way of playing to get good results. The Europeans which do have regular success against the Asian player are those which have all the good qualities such as fitness, taking the shuttle early, strength, speed as well as DECEPTION.

Peter Gade and Camilla Martin for example both have good cross court shots at the rear and the front of the court. Poul Erik Hoyer Larsen (an old lefty like me) was a very deceptive player from all positions of the court. (as a side comment I noticed that Peter plays over 70% of shots across the court in one way of another. It is likely that this functions as a good way of getting the opponent to twist and turn and hence slow down a little). To compete well against the Asian we have to slow them down a little.

One way to do this is to use negative deception. Quite simply if the racket is withdrawn from the shuttle before once again coming forward then the opponent will be stopped - slowed down. (try it for yourself). The object of the deception has been achieved and keeps the opponent at bay. Camilla Martin does this very well when she comes into the forecourt on the backhand side. She withdraws the racket very quickly (hence stopping the opponent) and then she jabs at just enough to send it over the net. It is very often a clean winner since the opponent is often stopped on the back line. Game and match to Miss Martin!

The modern Asian uses deception often and with good success. Its makes good sense that is should be part of a coaching plan. I cannot ever remember any coach in all my years trying to coach me deception in itself! It should be clear that considering deception simply as another weapon in the arsenal is a must for any player wishing to defeat the Asian who otherwise seem otherwise to be tireless in their speed of foot. Quite simply using deception can prevent them from taking the shuttle early. We all know what a killer that can be!

What Deceptive shots are there?

The answer to the above question is 'your fantasy is the only limit'. If it slows the opponent down, wrong foots them or makes them take the shuttle later than they might have done then consider it deception and use it with discretion. I am not about to list all the possible variations in a paper of this length and intended audiance. If you don't know then try watching Camilla Martin, Peter Gade, Peter Rasmussen.

If you have some tapes of old players then watch Hoyer Larsen. Look at the All England mens singles final for 2003. This was a very patchy game packed full of deceptive incidents. (I watched it live in on Danish TV).

Can deception be coached?

The simple answer is yes but its not easy. Before coaching a player deception that player must have a full range of normal shots using a good technique. Some deceptive shots require a fair degree of strength since the forearm and wrist are used as power horses to make up for a late arrival of the racket head to the shuttle. For this reason I would normally delay the teaching of deception until the age of about 14 at the earliest.

Think about some deceptive shots which consist of 'positive' or 'negative' deception. Inside these two categories you should also think about the addition of body movement or body swaying which also acts as a additional element. With this I mean that the body can easily move in a direction which not the same as which the racket takes. Possibly one of the best ways as a coach to prepare for coaching deception would be to watch a good number of top mens singles matches.

Classify the shots into deceptive and otherwise. Classify the deceptive shots into 'positive' and 'negative'. Furthermore classify them in shots involving body language or otherwise.

Closing comments

If you are a player then I would urge you to introduce deception into your game. Used correctly it will give you an edge in those situations when you feel under pressure.

Do not use it too often so that the opponent gets used to it. If you are a coach then develop a list of shots which you feel comfortable coaching and can demonstrate. Be prepared to accept that half of those players you are trying to coach will have absolutely no idea of the what you are trying to teach them and cannot reproduce your demonstrations.

I realise that I have not given the specifics of how to coach deception. Maybe I can find the time to sit down and construct it. Most of the time coaching it simply comes from the top of my head and never reaches a paper copy.