Chen Long vs Viktor Axelsen

[u/T-redditusername]

Many would, I hope, agree that Lin Dan followed by LCW stand at the top as the greatest players of the sport.

However, the third place at the podium is verily a contest between Chen Long and Axelsen. Both are among the greatest badminton players; whose your pick over the other?

[u/Routine_Corgi_9154]

Not sure what the criteria for assessment is (trophies only? or how good they were at peak?), but I would imagine Momota should also be in with a shout.

[u/T-redditusername → u/Routine_Corgi_9154]

Choose your assessment parameter; who'd you choose?

I am a die hard Momota fan and believe that if not for his personal misfortunes would have surpassed Axelsen and Chen Long comfortably but the truth is that his peak may be higher but his career pales well below both Chen Long and Axelsen.

[u/Saint_JT → u/T-redditusername]

Agreed. I get annoyed when people only pointvto trophies. Like, sure. Axelsen won absolutely everything, and went on a super dominant tear, and also very clearly improved and got better. But I don't think anyone giving a fair and honest assessment of his career can do anything other than put an asterisk against those achievements, because its super clear that he couldn't ever beat Momota. It took Momota being involved in a near fatal car crash that messed his vision up, getting covid, and then a niggling back injury (arguably also because of the accident: If it wasn't directly because if it, it certainly didn't help) before not just Victor, but ANYONE could beat him.

And I think anyone who seriously watched Momota playing can agree: his "Prime" form was not that. Kento wasn't in his prime. He was still getting better.

That's what was so scary about him in 2019 and 2020 before the car crash. We don't (unfortunately will never) know how good he could have become.

Trophies can be a good way of measuring how good someone is/was. But people acting like they're all that matters really need to look harder.

That's why I don't like a lot of the historical revisionism around LCW. Yes, really was that good, he really was that unbeatable, yes he was thar inspirational and influential. Acting like he isn't because he doesn't have a groaning trophy cabinet like Axelsen is, pardon my French, some BULLSHIT. Especially when Axelsen won so many of those accolades once a car accident took his biggest rival and roadblock off the map and cleared the field for him

[u/oxedei → u/Saint_JT]

These reasonings are honestly so stupid. You cant just rate a person based on potential, and use it to diminish the accomplishments of others. If that's the case, you could just as easily rate Axelsen even higher as he was held back by a back injury yet continued to play at the highest level.

[u/Saint_JT → u/oxedei]

I'm not just rating a player on potential, and thankfully, Momota won a whole bunch of titles and set a record for how many won in a season that still hasn't been broken, so I don't have to.

I'm saying titles are a good metric to measure how good a player is, but concentrating only on titles tell an incomplete story. Victor Axelsen is a well celebrated and deserving Olympic champion and gold medalist.

But those medals come with an asterisk, as the man who not only he couldn't beat, but almost no one else could beat, was involved in a fatal car crash, (and then later contracting Covid) leaving at least one of those Olympics wide open.

Being honest and analysing the game as much as we do, knowing that Kento wasn't going to be competing in the 2020 Olympics, I think most of us thought "Oh, okay. The Gold's Victor's then."

[u/T-redditusername → u/oxedei]

In case of Momota, there is an actual H2H against Axelsen that he just not leads but leads by a wide margin.

[u/Extension_One4601 → u/Saint_JT]

So what you’re saying is that Momota could be the best badminton player ever and therefor he is the goat? I have never tried basketball but I could have been the best and therefor I am the goat?

Momota was the best and he was incredibly hard to beat at one point, I dont deny that. But so was Naraoka, even though you cant compare these two

[u/Saint_JT → u/Extension_One4601]

I mean, it's all academic, but there's a very good argument to be made that he had the potential to surpass who we call the GOAT now. Because his Prime is misnamed. Its the best wed ever seen him, sure. But because he was still getting better, still improving etc etc we have no idea what his actual ceiling was. I suspect it was much much higher.

My point (which I admit, I took a long way round to getting to) is that titles championships etc are a great way to measure how good a player is. But they aren't they only way. Victor Axelsen is absolutely deserved as an Olympian and two time Gold Medalist. But those gold medals come with an Asterisk, because the one man that not only he couldn't beat, but literally almost no-one could beat, wasn't there to challenge his run to those medals.

And concentrating on titles only seems to recently be starting a weird, historical revisionism around how good LCW was, e.g. "He wasn't that good, wheres his medals/titles?" Sure, looking only at titles, he's an also-ran. But I personally don't think anyone who seriously analyses the game can say LCW was good, but not that good.

This is, after all, the man who took two games off Prime Momota.

[u/Indora1997 → u/Saint_JT]

Yeah I see your point and definitely agree with the fact that Axelsen's achievements do not display the full story.

Regarding Lee, I genuinely think that he is respectable but if you put him on the scale and compare him with others, he struggles. I would say that in terms of being inspirational through his hardwork, Lee reigns at the top. His hardwork, demonstrated through his number of weeks as number 1 and titles, is clear. In all other metrics though, he struggles. I am not even referring to just stats. As a player, I dont think Lee understands the game as well as others. His mental game was always fairly weak especially during big games. His footwork and technique did not really improve much over the years after 2012. On the other hand, Chen Long improved his game considerably leading up to the 2016 Olympic. He prepared well for it. His shots were absolutely monstrous during the final, for example.

[u/T-redditusername → u/Saint_JT]

Agreed.

For the great player that Axelsen obviously is, but he hit the jackpot in his career with Momota getting into a life changing accident and a much lower grade of competition.

I do think that Axelsen improved drastically to become a much better player with time but this period was also synonymous with the roster filled with mid players like Lee Zii Jia, Kodai Naraoko, Ginting, Lakshya Sen, Jonathan Christie, Antonsen, Prannoy etc. Only Shi Yu qi was a good competitor.

Momota had Axelsen on the ropes everytime they played before the accident. 11-2 is not a competition, it is an annihilation.

[u/Agile-Forever2442 → u/T-redditusername]

No one was calling Ginting mid when he beat Momota/CL, and he also started with a positive H2H against Axelsen. There’s definitely an argument that Ginting and Antonsen could’ve been great players but Axelsen made them look average.

So I don’t really buy the weak era argument. That being said, Momota was a fantastic player who owned Axelsen numerous times, and I would argue this contributed to Axelsen’s success as it motivated his post Covid improvements.

Axelsen was fortunate with Momota’s accident. But he’s still shown he can win all the titles across different conditions multiple times (all 4 super 1000s, the most WTFs, double Olympic and WC as well as All England etc). His dominance also lasted longer than CL; for this reason Axelsen is above him for me.

You can also make similar arguments for CL; he lost to Lin Dan numerous times early in their H2H and only started to dominate in 2014/5 when Lin Dan played less matches/got older and worse. He was always able to beat LCW though which is full credit to him.

[u/Friedbuffalos → u/T-redditusername]

Calling this era "mid" is disgusting and disrespectful. You only call it a weaker era because one guy was just way ahead of the curve.

Axelsen was so good he made other players look bad, that's just how it is. To discredit someone because he played in a "weaker era" and furthermore because he didn't play against "one guy" is just insanity.

By your logic I can put an asterisk on every player who won a title because they've never played against me or beaten me. They have a 0% winrate against me therefore it's a fake trophy.

[u/Cool_Heron_9683]

I don't agree with Lee Chong Wei being on the second best overall tbh. Or even third. Keep in mind, the times where Lee Chong Wei is able to reach the finals of Olympics and World Championships when he wasn't being thwarted by Lin Dan, Chen Long was the one who prevented him from getting his first ever gold medal on all occasions. Both Chen Long and Viktor Axelsen has something Lee Chong Wei would never have: Two gold medals on World Championships. And both of them are also three times consecutive olympic medalists, which is a feat that Lee Chong Wei achieved, but unlike them he didn't win gold in any of his run.

I would personally rank Viktor Axelsen above Chen Long for not only his two gold olympic medals, but also his dominance during and post COVID era is insane. He was basically the perfect package of a player that you wanted, being gigantic, incredible court coverage, terrifying smash power, and constantly create single digit wins against his opponents. I would see the arguments against him because Viktor does lose a lot to Chen Long and Lee Chong Wei during his career, but they primed on different era and I feel like Viktor has a better overall prime era.

[u/T-redditusername → u/Cool_Heron_9683]

Lee Chong Wei does suffer in case of Major trophies and both Axelsen and Chen Long far surpass him.

But man, Lee Chong Wei was a magesterial player in his prime and was Ranked no. 1 for such a long time which spoke of his consistency. If not for the GOAT Lin Dan, Lee Chong Wei was so above the rest of the players and even younger ones. His matches with Axelsen and Momota in his 30s were absolute beauties. For the London Olympics, after finally beating Lin Dan he faltered against Chen Long(sighs).

But yes, I can see how many would put Chen Long and Axelsen over him.

[u/shawarma0123 → u/T-redditusername]

Lee chong wei did not beat lin dan in the london Olympics

[u/T-redditusername → u/shawarma0123]

Sorry my bad, the Brazil Olympics was it ?

[u/nhsg17 → u/T-redditusername]

> If not for the GOAT Lin Dan, Lee Chong Wei was so above the rest of the players and even younger ones.

Lee ChongWei played in 10 WC, 4 Olympics, and was only stopped by Lin Dan in 4 of those. Lee ChongWei just couldn't handle the pressure at the highest level. Not sure how the fuck anyone can put a player that has zero WC/Olympics Gold as top 2. Easily Chen Long is above him. They have similar H:H, but Chen Long won over him in 2 WC finals and an Olympic final.

At the end of the day, sports is about who can win it at the highest level, and LCW hasn't been able to do it even once.

[u/Desperate_Molasses67 → u/nhsg17]

true, lcw is my personal favorite, but you just cannot compare someone who has never won the bigs regardless of consistency. to be honest, the competition in lcw's era is just not as strong as the modern era, which is a sentiment echoed by today's pros.

[u/Dc0987 → u/Cool_Heron_9683]

Agreed on this. It's bad timing for LCW meeting LD and CL entering his prime. But the records tell the story.

Would put VA slightly over CL tho but both very equal

[u/zephy-1r]

Trophy for trophy, Axelsen wins no doubt, but Prime for prime, it's really close, i personally edge out Axelsen, you can make the case for Chen long since he is quite literally just Chinese momota

[u/T-redditusername → u/zephy-1r]

I think that while Axelsen has the superior accolades, the competition that Chen Long had to contend with was higher than Axelsen and even then Chen Long won an Olympic Gold and amassed as many as trophies that he did.

[u/oxedei → u/T-redditusername]

Badminton players have only gotten better and better.

[u/zephy-1r → u/zephy-1r]

Also that CL is tall like Axelsen and has immense court reach

[u/jumbopopsicle]

Here's the weird thing about ranking axelsen, in terms of trophies, it's clear he ranks above lcw momota and CL. But looking at his H2H against the 3 of them, his results are pure dogshit, especially against momota.

Honestly these sort of rankings are useless because everyone judges differently. If you insist on trophies, would you rank Lee yang/WCL as the greatest for winning back to back Olympic golds? Or just by individual dominance in a calendar year like 2019 momota? Or by longevity like LCW?

Of all things said, Lin Dan is the goat of MS and ASY is the goat of WS no debate lol

[u/doesntmatterxdxd → u/jumbopopsicle]

Ranking Axelsen above those 3 is like ranking Carlos Alcaraz above Federer/Nadal/Djokovic.

[u/Hairy-Jelly7310 → u/jumbopopsicle]

Honestly yeah lee yang and wang chi lin are the goats just because it's so ridiculous they won 2 golds lol

[u/Colonist10e9snt → u/Hairy-Jelly7310]

They are not. Fu Hai Feng alone has more world champs, titles AND olympic medals.

[u/Hairy-Jelly7310 → u/Colonist10e9snt]

You must be fun at parties

[u/Colonist10e9snt → u/Hairy-Jelly7310]

How so. Just because I pointed the obvious? XD

[u/dwite_hawerd → u/Hairy-Jelly7310]

I think their Tokyo 2020 gold was justified because of their dominance at three big tournaments during the 2021 "Bangkok bubble" tournaments in Thailand.

However, their Paris 2024 gold was a fluke in my opinion. They only won one tournament (Japan Open 2023) between both Olympics and they were not seeded for Paris 2024.

[u/Friedbuffalos → u/jumbopopsicle]

H2H is not a very good way to dictate one's "greatness"

Axelsen leads 6-3 vs Lin Dan in H2H. By that logic he's probably the GOAT right?

Has to be based on achievements, dominance, and sport impact. I believe Lin Dan is clear No.1 and Axelsen is close with Lee Chong Wei for No.2.

[u/Dull_Door_9376]

1. Lin Dan

2. Chen Long/Axelsen

3. LCW

[u/Working_Horse7711]

VA over CL because China’s gold medalists were known to have taken huge rests after their Olympic win(s) and recharged properly.
VA is great because he managed almost every aspect of his career and has gotten better as he aged. It’s more impressive to me that he could peak in performance while building his career. CL has a great character, held his own ground under the shadow of his compatriots’ achievements. In contrast, all of LCW’s juniors crumbled under the his achievements.
LCW has a special place in badminton, his biggest achievement was he pushed all China MS to newer heights.

[u/rainpforest]

Are we comparing trophies or not? If not, I think I would have to go with Chen Long. Dude was just a wall. Grinds you down. Even if you win, it'll come at a cost.

[u/Fancydane → u/rainpforest]

Axelsen was nothing like that?

[u/rainpforest → u/Fancydane]

He has those qualities but they are not as pervasive in his gameplay as they were in chen long's. CL's game was always rally style. Axelsen doesn't always wear you down. He would go for creative shots. Not CL. That due would rally you crack. Consistent shots, textbook method of moving your opponent all around the court. I personally rank him higher just because his style appeal more to me as well. Axelsen sometimes would frustrate me. Especially early in his career where he would insist on smashing down the line with virtually zero margin for error even on days where he would over smash out consistently. With CL, you know what you get.

[u/rainpforest → u/Fancydane]

He has those qualities but they are not as pervasive in his gameplay as they were in chen long's. CL's game was always rally style. Axelsen doesn't always wear you down. He would go for creative shots. Not CL. That due would rally you crack. Consistent shots, textbook method of moving your opponent all around the court. I personally rank him higher just because his style appeal more to me as well. Axelsen sometimes would frustrate me. Especially early in his career where he would insist on smashing down the line with virtually zero margin for error even on days where he would over smash out consistently. With CL, you know what you get.

[u/Indora1997]

Lin Dan stands at the far top, well above the rest. That much is clear. However, I would tread lightly when it comes to comparing Lee Chong Wei, Chen Long and Viktor Axelsen. They each have something going for them.

If we go based off statistics, the goat website does provide a point of view

https://badmintonranks.com/goat/index?type=WS

I somewhat I agree with the ranking of Lin > Axelsen > Chen > Lee. Lee lacks the big titles of the other 3. Axelsen and Chen both had a period of no competition but Axelsen's was considerably longer so he is ranked higher.

I wouldnt use H2H statistics. Near Olympic Gold Chen vs young Axelsen, obviously Chen will win the majority.

[u/helloimredditaddict → u/Indora1997]

It’s worth to note In terms of capability wise Lin Dan and LCW were very close during certain periods of their prime. Many of the major titles were only separated by 2 points.

[u/Indora1997 → u/helloimredditaddict]

That's an interesting point. It is true that some major titles were separated by 2 points. However, I am not sure that says they were close during certain periods of their prime. This is a tough analysis since we do not have enough data. Lee's prime period is 2009 - 2015, when he held the rank 1 spot in the world and produce very quality matches (I find that Lee and Lin's performance in 2016 considerably worse so they have definitely gone downhill). Lin's prime is much earlier, 2004 - 2012. If we take the overlapping period of 2009 - 2012, there are exactly 2 matches that ended with a 2 point gap, namely the famous World Championship and Olympic matches. This is a very small sample size but these matches are extremely high-stake so they are somewhat representative. My view is that if they were close in capability, it would be a 1-1 for these two games, not 2-0. I think they were definitely close in terms of their physicality stats such as stamina, footwork, techniques. However, in terms of mentality and strategy, Lin was still a step above Lee and thus, definitely not close.

[u/helloimredditaddict → u/Indora1997]

I think you are over complicating the stats. 2 point difference near the end can go both ways. It could go 2-0 Lin Dan or even 2-0 Lee Chong Wei. They were very close in 2 of the most important match of their careers, and both 2011 and 2012, and even 2013 WC were during their prime years. The scores were incredibly close. Those few games represent what the highest level of badminton each player could play given that they dedicate all their energy towards it. It says their capacity was on par with each other when the stake was highest.

Yes I agree lin Dan is superior in terms of mental strength. I’m not arguing LCW is better.

My point is LCW is undisputed second to Lin Dan.

No other men singles could rival their capacity.

It’s just unfortunately for LCW when lcw and Lin Dan were going downhill CL rose up and took Lin Dans spot. It’s an uphill battle from there.

I don’t agree with the idea a title alone is a measure of a players performance or impact. If that were the case Alex Lanier is a much better player than LCW simply because he has a WC title. It has to do with the level of competition as well.

[u/helloimredditaddict]

There is more nuance involved. Chinese coaching and support teams far surpass Malaysian coaching. Malaysian coaching staff and administrators were terrible to say the least. Most of their badminton officials were counter productive to say the least. This was mentioned and criticised by coaches like Li Mao etc.

Chinese players have access to specialised training where second rate players will basically learn and copy LCW and other top world players just for the purpose of training their first rate players.

China also have numbers advantage. Players like Du Peng Yu have a task of tiring out LCW before big finals like the 2013 WC. The Chinese coaches congratulated DPY on a loss to LCW in the semis of 2013 WC as if he beat LCW, simply because he dragged the match to 1 hour and thirty minutes.

There are a lot of under the table strategies and nuances involved most fans don’t see.

Most people just see the surface, like numbers of medals etc, while blind to what goes on behind the scenes.

While agree Lin Dan is the stronger player than LCW, he is undisputed. There are more nuances involved when it comes to others.

[u/kaibitu]

The amount of disrespect that LCW gets on this subs is shocking.
The number of BWF superseries titles that LCW has won is more than double of what LD, CL, and VA have won. Besides having the highest win percentage in all of MS, he's also had the most number of weeks as No.1 . If that's not an indicator of dominance, then I don't know what dominance is.
I do consider than LD had LCW's number and their H2H reflects that. Morever LD is the clear number 1, as he's won almost everything.
However, to call VA and CL better than LCW is just outright wrong. It is true that LCW lost in the most important finals. However, he was dominating during the remainder of the season. If CL and VA were clearly better than LCW, then why didn't they win as often and amassed as many titles in the remainder of the season ? One can argue that they peaked at the right tournaments, but never truly had as much of sustained dominance as LD and LCW had.

[u/HicHuc123]

I'd easily rank Viktor and Momota ahead of LCW.

[u/T-redditusername → u/HicHuc123]

Whatttt ? Even Momota ? 🥲

3 Olympics Silver, 4 All England (Thrice Runner up), 69 International Titles, around 348 weeks as no. 1 ranked; and all these while contending with Lin Dan and Chen Long.

Lee Chong Wei has an equal Head to Head ratio with Prime Momota even with the huge age gap and 11-3 against Axelsen before he retired.

The LCW slander has to stop!

[u/Gminton88 → u/T-redditusername]

The H2H of LCW vs Axelsen is a silly stat to quote - check when those matches are played, more that half are from when Axelsen was a teenager and LCW is in his prime. Hardly a fair comparison...

You can't directly compare eras like that as you're never comparing prime to prime so it will always favour one of the players.

It's the same reason why axelsen has a favourable H2H vs Lin Dan - he beat him 3 times in a row towards the end of his career but that's in favour of VA.

7 of LCW's wins vs VA are 2015 and earlier (he turned 21 years old in 2015 lol) - not sure that's a great argument.

[u/HicHuc123 → u/T-redditusername]

There was never a period where LCW was clearly the most dominant player in MS. Lin Dan, Viktor and Momota had long periods where there was no doubt that they were going to win whatever tournament they participated in.

[u/T-redditusername → u/HicHuc123]

Wouldn't that signal to a lower competition during Momota and Axelsen's time ? I can only think of Shi-Yuqi who was a proper competitor during these times. Ginting was inconsistent and only passed the eye test.

Lee Chong Wei was ranked no. 1 from 2008 to 2012 and finished as rank 1 for 6 consecutive years 2008-2013.

[u/Remarkable_Swing_612 → u/HicHuc123]

That doesn't mean anything.

[u/ttk_rutial → u/HicHuc123]

Nah, LCW was still really good even in Momota's prime years

[u/Remarkable_Swing_612]

Both are equal imo

[u/hieplenet]

if Chen Long is not Chinese, he will be without a doubt, top 2.

So IMO: LD, CL, LCW

VA has better awards than LCW, but the VA domination period is a bit shorter and has less competion than previous era. VA is also losing hard in 2h2 records against CL and LCW.

[u/Dazzling-Cat-3763]

they call me 0/0

0 OG gold, 0 WC gold, somehow still in the goat conversation lol