1996 Uber Cup qualification
badminton competition
The qualifying process for the 1996 Uber Cup took place from 18 to 25 February 1996 to decide the final teams which would play in the final tournament.
Qualification process
The qualification process was divided into two regions, the Asian Zone and the European Zone. Seeded teams received a bye into the second round while unseeded teams competed in the first round for a place in the second round. The first two rounds were played in a round-robin format. Teams in the second round competed for a place in the knockout stages. Semi-final winners in each zone were guaranteed qualification for the final tournament to be held in Hong Kong while the remaining teams competed in a third place playoff match for a place in the final tournament.
Indonesia qualified for the final tournament as defending champions while Hong Kong qualified as hosts.
Qualified teams
Asian Zone
The qualification rounds for the Asian Zone were held from 18 to 25 February at Auckland Badminton Hall in Auckland, New Zealand. Ten teams took part in qualifying for the final tournament.
First round
Group A
Group B
Second round
Group X
Group Y
Knockout stage
Semi-finals
Third place
Final
European Zone
The European qualifying rounds were held in Průhonice Hall in Prague, Czech Republic.
Begin with the source’s own compact description: “1996 Uber Cup qualification” is badminton competition. The dossier treats that line as a proposition to test through Uber, qualification and badminton, not as a finished interpretation.
Why this record matters
The phrase “badminton competition” supplies a clear boundary for inquiry. It also exposes the unanswered questions: who defined that boundary, when it became stable and which sources sit outside it.
The citation trail is more important than the brevity of the summary: it shows where individual claims can be examined in context. The source revision retrieved here is dated Sep 4, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q139985421. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1996.
The absence of detail may reflect summary conventions rather than a lack of surviving documentation. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “1996 Uber Cup qualification”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow 1996 Uber Cup qualification primary sources, 1996 Uber Cup qualification archive and Uber research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “1996 Uber Cup qualification”?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “1996 Uber Cup qualification” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.