The World Badminton Federation Split of 1978, Explained

Last reviewed: August 2026 · Written by the Badminton House player-led team

The names create the first trap. The World Badminton Federation, or WBF, was the separate body created in 1978. The International Badminton Federation, or IBF, continued during the split. Today’s Badminton World Federation, or BWF, is the name the continuing IBF adopted in 2006; it is not the defunct 1978 WBF.

The dates and competitions need the same care. Contemporary sources disagree by one day over the WBF’s formation: the IBF report says 24 February, while Peking Review says 25 February. Bangkok hosted a WBF World Championships in 1978, while Hangzhou hosted WBF World Cup events in 1979. London approved conditional voting-rule proposals in March 1981; Tokyo completed unification in May.

---

The IBF before the split

Representatives of nine national badminton organizations established the IBF at Bush House, Aldwych, London, on 5 July 1934. Canada was one of the nine founding members. BWF’s institutional history identifies the date, place and founding group.

That address corrects another repeated error. Cheltenham later became associated with IBF administration, but it was not the 1934 founding site. By 1978 the IBF already had more than four decades of institutional history, so the new WBF became a rival body rather than replacing it.

---

Why sources give 24 and 25 February

The safest account preserves both dates and reports the disagreement rather than inventing two stages. The IBF’s April 1978 issue of World Badminton says a meeting convened to officially form the WBF took place on 24 February. Delegates representing 13 Asian and six African associations adopted interim statutes and elected officers.

A contemporary Peking Review account instead says the WBF was founded on 25 February. Both sources support the same membership total: 19 associations, not 22.

These publications came from opposing sides of the dispute. Because neither explains the one-day discrepancy, treating the dates as competing attributed accounts is more accurate than inventing separate stages or choosing one unsupported anniversary.

---

The documented disputes behind the split

Contemporary IBF and PRC/WBF-aligned accounts identify voting structure and Taiwan/PRC representation among the disputes. The PRC account also names South African membership during apartheid. Their descriptions are not neutral transcripts, so the evidence supports naming these issues without assigning one private motive to all 19 associations.

Voting was a concrete institutional disagreement. The IBF publication described WBF supporters as seeking “one nation, one vote,” while the IBF system could give a member more than one vote. Recognition questions concerned which association represented China internationally and how the association from Taiwan participated. The political language in each camp’s account belongs to that source, not to a modern narrator.

---

What the split changed for competition

The divide reached players directly. The April 1978 IBF record says competitors at a February Hong Kong tournament were declared ineligible for IBF-sanctioned competition. Meanwhile, the WBF staged its own major events.

Calling both events World Championships collapses two distinct competitions. The sources support Bangkok as the 1978 WBF World Championships and Hangzhou as 1979 WBF World Cup events.

---

What the 57–7 Rule 8(d) vote actually approved

At an IBF Extraordinary General Meeting in London on 23 March 1981, delegates considered several voting-rule proposals connected to the path toward unification. The 57–7 tally approved Council’s Rule 8(d) proposal, not a standalone vote to merge the federations. The report states that the rule changes would take effect only at a second EGM in Tokyo and only if Council proposed them after the unification meeting earlier that day.

The IBF’s June 1981 report, “IBF Approve the Deal”, records the meeting, subjects, tallies and implementation condition. At that stage, the result was approval of a conditional dual-voting proposal. Calling 57–7 “the merger vote” hides both the other ballots and the actual subject approved.

---

The Tokyo unification

The March IBF record also noted use of the Chinese-Taipei association name and South Africa’s declaration that it would not enter the Thomas Cup, Uber Cup or World Championships. These were recorded around the agreement; the surviving report does not reproduce every clause of the eventual deed.

Stellan Mohlin for the IBF and Dawee Chullasapya for the WBF signed the Deed of Unification in Tokyo on Tuesday, 26 May 1981. The IBF’s September 1981 account, “Together at Last”, documents the ceremony, date, place and signatories.

The unified organization retained the International Badminton Federation name. In 2006 it became the Badminton World Federation, as recorded in an official BWF major-events bidding document.

With those boundaries, the split becomes a clear three-year governance story: a rival federation formed, players and competitions felt the divide, voting rules changed, and representatives of both bodies signed a documented unification.