|
Wow.
DQ the players, but please fire the people who thought this format would be a good idea and never, ever hire them for anything again. That should show them a small fraction of what it feels to be DQ'd from a shot at getting a gold medal.
|
On August 01 2012 22:38 Yoduh wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2012 21:43 Micket wrote:
The decision is an absolute joke. Should football teams gets disqualified for putting a reserve team out? Should Usain Bolt be disqualified for jogging a 200m semi's heat and coming 2nd?
Should swimmers be disqualified for not trying hard in a semi to conserve energy? An athlete shouldn't be forced to play in a situation where winning is disadvantageous, thats unfair on the athletes/ swimmers and runners aren't gaming the system, whether they race for getting 1st or 8th in the overall semi they still race against the same opponents in the finals. those athletes are just trying to make it past a cut. the badmitton players are purposely playing inadequately in order to avoid one opponent for another in the next round. that's a different situation, and is unsportsmanlike. when you play in the olympics, you play in the olympic spirit of fair competition. the organizers had a non-ideal format, but it's no excuse for players to take advantage of the system like that. like if you accidentally left your front door open one night, it doesn't give anyone the right to come in and rob you while you sleep just because the opportunity was there.
So you say they should try their hardest to win, knowing they will be "punished" for it?
|
On August 01 2012 22:34 sharkie wrote:
How can people condone any sort of match fixing?
Those saying it increases their chance to win: Wth, where is the difference in meeting someone in the SF or finals?
To win you have to beat them anyway.
They do plan to win, but they want to take the safer road. If you were seeded Code S, the worst scenario is if your first elimination is against IMMVP and then he takes champion, you get kicked in ro8. You COULD be 2nd place, but you wont' know because the eventual champion destroyed you in the very beginning.
|
On August 01 2012 22:40 Louis8k8 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2012 22:28 red4ce wrote:On August 01 2012 22:21 Louis8k8 wrote:
I don't mind the DQs for this event but badminton needs to gtfo of olympics until it has a format where winning matches doesn't decrease your chance of getting a medal. The 4 team coaches and the Australian couch (they interviewed that coach and she? said the system is quite broken) and countless previous ones all see the obvious reason why losing a game increases chance of getting a medal.
It's promoting corrupt competition. Just like how ice dancing was removed from winter olympics because their system was dysfunctional and cannot return as an olympic sport until sorted out. Nearly all major professional tournaments including the previous olympics use a single elimination format. Sometimes highly ranked players get seeds into later rounds but that's it. I have no idea why they switched to group stages this time around. Yes I was talking to some friends about it (they don't pay much attention to Olympics) and I realized that badminton is one of very few (the only one i can think of) with this kind of matching. This only applies to 1 team vs 1 team games (which they wanted to a easy opponent in this case), where all of them are not taking place simultaneously (If it was simultaneous, you wouldn't know who's ranked high and who to avoid or who's easy). They should have been seeded/placed the moment they qualified. And this is nothing like a under-the-table match fixing that's so hated on. It's still technically match fixing but this wasn't a consensus where both teams agreed on the result with/without money involved.
I believe beach volleyball also uses a group stage into elimination bracket format. I don't know if the games are played simultaneously or what other measures they use to prevent collusion since they, like badminton, allow 2 teams per country
|
Lol at officials - to perserve face, lets protect our broken format by DQing teams
Tournaments should always organise themselves where there is 0% reason to lose a match
|
And props to that Australian(?) team. The coach realized the system was broken but they didn't take that path of bad sportsmanship. (or they didn't play yet, I didn't watch it live)
|
ultra sad-face. i will never understand the mentality of these badminton players
they have the ability to beat the best of the best, yet they'd rather avoid other great players and risk going down in history as cheaters in the largest international tournament.
honestly, i'd be so incredibly happy to simply get a chance to compete. throwing games is taking it to the next level of their professional careers.
|
On August 01 2012 22:47 red4ce wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2012 22:40 Louis8k8 wrote:On August 01 2012 22:28 red4ce wrote:On August 01 2012 22:21 Louis8k8 wrote:
I don't mind the DQs for this event but badminton needs to gtfo of olympics until it has a format where winning matches doesn't decrease your chance of getting a medal. The 4 team coaches and the Australian couch (they interviewed that coach and she? said the system is quite broken) and countless previous ones all see the obvious reason why losing a game increases chance of getting a medal.
It's promoting corrupt competition. Just like how ice dancing was removed from winter olympics because their system was dysfunctional and cannot return as an olympic sport until sorted out. Nearly all major professional tournaments including the previous olympics use a single elimination format. Sometimes highly ranked players get seeds into later rounds but that's it. I have no idea why they switched to group stages this time around. Yes I was talking to some friends about it (they don't pay much attention to Olympics) and I realized that badminton is one of very few (the only one i can think of) with this kind of matching. This only applies to 1 team vs 1 team games (which they wanted to a easy opponent in this case), where all of them are not taking place simultaneously (If it was simultaneous, you wouldn't know who's ranked high and who to avoid or who's easy). They should have been seeded/placed the moment they qualified. And this is nothing like a under-the-table match fixing that's so hated on. It's still technically match fixing but this wasn't a consensus where both teams agreed on the result with/without money involved. I believe beach volleyball also uses a group stage into elimination bracket format. I don't know if the games are played simultaneously or what other measures they use to prevent collusion since they, like badminton, allow 2 teams per country
I'm quoting you because it brought up an idea, so I'm not actually speaking against what you said. But in a system like FIFA, you don't put Brazil and Italy together at the very start. You put the highest-ranked teams as far as possible. This was exactly the opposite. China didn't want to play the best ranked team, so they tried to perform badly. Why are the best teams put against each other for at the start of elimination? Any other system puts the best team against the worst team. They save the best for last.
If playing better means getting put against a weak opponent first, then everyone will race to be the best ranked team would they not? I hope beach volleyball wasn't as broken as badminton's. That simple setup (that maybe volleyball did have? I didn't watch qualifiers) also removes this flaw.
|
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
Wake up this morning, see the women teams get DQ'ed. Well, that was expected though I don't think Indonesia was that blatant
|
Mixed Poland vs China:
MATEUSIAK/ZIEBA 21:23 XU/MA
in the third set, must have been a hell of a game
|
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
|
At the Olympics you play for your country and those Chinese played to ensure that China stood the best chance to medal.
It reminded me of F1 drivers letting their teammate pass them so their teammate can win the overall driver championship points.
Here are some other interesting examples: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Match_fixing#Better_playoff_chances
|
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
Santoso just on full tilt now.
|
GRAND OLD AMERICA16375 Posts
If BWF does not appeal their decision, then I will have to figure out what to do with those who had the DQ teams in their pick'em pools. Any advice and opinions are greatly welcomed
|
I don't get it... If they make it that easy to abuse their tournament format the people who came up with that shit should be DQed from their job, not the players who try to win the tournament.
|
On August 01 2012 22:54 Louis8k8 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2012 22:47 red4ce wrote:On August 01 2012 22:40 Louis8k8 wrote:On August 01 2012 22:28 red4ce wrote:On August 01 2012 22:21 Louis8k8 wrote:
I don't mind the DQs for this event but badminton needs to gtfo of olympics until it has a format where winning matches doesn't decrease your chance of getting a medal. The 4 team coaches and the Australian couch (they interviewed that coach and she? said the system is quite broken) and countless previous ones all see the obvious reason why losing a game increases chance of getting a medal.
It's promoting corrupt competition. Just like how ice dancing was removed from winter olympics because their system was dysfunctional and cannot return as an olympic sport until sorted out. Nearly all major professional tournaments including the previous olympics use a single elimination format. Sometimes highly ranked players get seeds into later rounds but that's it. I have no idea why they switched to group stages this time around. Yes I was talking to some friends about it (they don't pay much attention to Olympics) and I realized that badminton is one of very few (the only one i can think of) with this kind of matching. This only applies to 1 team vs 1 team games (which they wanted to a easy opponent in this case), where all of them are not taking place simultaneously (If it was simultaneous, you wouldn't know who's ranked high and who to avoid or who's easy). They should have been seeded/placed the moment they qualified. And this is nothing like a under-the-table match fixing that's so hated on. It's still technically match fixing but this wasn't a consensus where both teams agreed on the result with/without money involved. I believe beach volleyball also uses a group stage into elimination bracket format. I don't know if the games are played simultaneously or what other measures they use to prevent collusion since they, like badminton, allow 2 teams per country I'm quoting you because it brought up an idea, so I'm not actually speaking against what you said. But in a system like FIFA, you don't put Brazil and Italy together at the very start. You put the highest-ranked teams as far as possible. This was exactly the opposite. China didn't want to play the best ranked team, so they tried to perform badly. Why are the best teams put against each other for at the start of elimination? Any other system puts the best team against the worst team. They save the best for last. If playing better means getting put against a weak opponent first, then everyone will race to be the best ranked team would they not? I hope beach volleyball wasn't as broken as badminton's. That simple setup (that maybe volleyball did have? I didn't watch qualifiers) also removes this flaw.
The second ranked Chinese team got upset by a lower seed. The "higher" seed on the other side would've gotten a tougher opponent.
I don't get the outrage here about the format, really. Just about all team leagues from FIFA, NBA, MLB, etc. use a round robin format. Teams tank games to get better seeding or draft picks but they don't do it this blatantly. There's a difference between playing your bench versus having your players repeatedly throwing the ball out of bounds.
|
On August 01 2012 23:40 andrewlt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2012 22:54 Louis8k8 wrote:On August 01 2012 22:47 red4ce wrote:On August 01 2012 22:40 Louis8k8 wrote:On August 01 2012 22:28 red4ce wrote:On August 01 2012 22:21 Louis8k8 wrote:
I don't mind the DQs for this event but badminton needs to gtfo of olympics until it has a format where winning matches doesn't decrease your chance of getting a medal. The 4 team coaches and the Australian couch (they interviewed that coach and she? said the system is quite broken) and countless previous ones all see the obvious reason why losing a game increases chance of getting a medal.
It's promoting corrupt competition. Just like how ice dancing was removed from winter olympics because their system was dysfunctional and cannot return as an olympic sport until sorted out. Nearly all major professional tournaments including the previous olympics use a single elimination format. Sometimes highly ranked players get seeds into later rounds but that's it. I have no idea why they switched to group stages this time around. Yes I was talking to some friends about it (they don't pay much attention to Olympics) and I realized that badminton is one of very few (the only one i can think of) with this kind of matching. This only applies to 1 team vs 1 team games (which they wanted to a easy opponent in this case), where all of them are not taking place simultaneously (If it was simultaneous, you wouldn't know who's ranked high and who to avoid or who's easy). They should have been seeded/placed the moment they qualified. And this is nothing like a under-the-table match fixing that's so hated on. It's still technically match fixing but this wasn't a consensus where both teams agreed on the result with/without money involved. I believe beach volleyball also uses a group stage into elimination bracket format. I don't know if the games are played simultaneously or what other measures they use to prevent collusion since they, like badminton, allow 2 teams per country I'm quoting you because it brought up an idea, so I'm not actually speaking against what you said. But in a system like FIFA, you don't put Brazil and Italy together at the very start. You put the highest-ranked teams as far as possible. This was exactly the opposite. China didn't want to play the best ranked team, so they tried to perform badly. Why are the best teams put against each other for at the start of elimination? Any other system puts the best team against the worst team. They save the best for last. If playing better means getting put against a weak opponent first, then everyone will race to be the best ranked team would they not? I hope beach volleyball wasn't as broken as badminton's. That simple setup (that maybe volleyball did have? I didn't watch qualifiers) also removes this flaw. The second ranked Chinese team got upset by a lower seed. The "higher" seed on the other side would've gotten a tougher opponent. I don't get the outrage here about the format, really. Just about all team leagues from FIFA, NBA, MLB, etc. use a round robin format. Teams tank games to get better seeding or draft picks but they don't do it this blatantly. There's a difference between playing your bench versus having your players repeatedly throwing the ball out of bounds.
In the end it's the same though, you'll have a lower quality game. The only difference is that the badminton doubles don't have a bench.
|
On August 01 2012 23:44 FliedLice wrote:Show nested quote +On August 01 2012 23:40 andrewlt wrote:On August 01 2012 22:54 Louis8k8 wrote:On August 01 2012 22:47 red4ce wrote:On August 01 2012 22:40 Louis8k8 wrote:On August 01 2012 22:28 red4ce wrote:On August 01 2012 22:21 Louis8k8 wrote:
I don't mind the DQs for this event but badminton needs to gtfo of olympics until it has a format where winning matches doesn't decrease your chance of getting a medal. The 4 team coaches and the Australian couch (they interviewed that coach and she? said the system is quite broken) and countless previous ones all see the obvious reason why losing a game increases chance of getting a medal.
It's promoting corrupt competition. Just like how ice dancing was removed from winter olympics because their system was dysfunctional and cannot return as an olympic sport until sorted out. Nearly all major professional tournaments including the previous olympics use a single elimination format. Sometimes highly ranked players get seeds into later rounds but that's it. I have no idea why they switched to group stages this time around. Yes I was talking to some friends about it (they don't pay much attention to Olympics) and I realized that badminton is one of very few (the only one i can think of) with this kind of matching. This only applies to 1 team vs 1 team games (which they wanted to a easy opponent in this case), where all of them are not taking place simultaneously (If it was simultaneous, you wouldn't know who's ranked high and who to avoid or who's easy). They should have been seeded/placed the moment they qualified. And this is nothing like a under-the-table match fixing that's so hated on. It's still technically match fixing but this wasn't a consensus where both teams agreed on the result with/without money involved. I believe beach volleyball also uses a group stage into elimination bracket format. I don't know if the games are played simultaneously or what other measures they use to prevent collusion since they, like badminton, allow 2 teams per country I'm quoting you because it brought up an idea, so I'm not actually speaking against what you said. But in a system like FIFA, you don't put Brazil and Italy together at the very start. You put the highest-ranked teams as far as possible. This was exactly the opposite. China didn't want to play the best ranked team, so they tried to perform badly. Why are the best teams put against each other for at the start of elimination? Any other system puts the best team against the worst team. They save the best for last. If playing better means getting put against a weak opponent first, then everyone will race to be the best ranked team would they not? I hope beach volleyball wasn't as broken as badminton's. That simple setup (that maybe volleyball did have? I didn't watch qualifiers) also removes this flaw. The second ranked Chinese team got upset by a lower seed. The "higher" seed on the other side would've gotten a tougher opponent. I don't get the outrage here about the format, really. Just about all team leagues from FIFA, NBA, MLB, etc. use a round robin format. Teams tank games to get better seeding or draft picks but they don't do it this blatantly. There's a difference between playing your bench versus having your players repeatedly throwing the ball out of bounds. In the end it's the same though, you'll have a lower quality game. The only difference is that the badminton doubles don't have a bench.
There is still a difference to the spectators, though. They could still play a vanilla game where they don't do anything special or don't go all out. Playing so badly that some scrub off the street can beat you is another thing entirely.
|
Can't blame the players at all. It's the system they use that doesn't work for the olympics that's all. These players get a chance to play every 4th fucking year, who the hell wouldn't try to gain every advantage possible?
People who claim "but you will still have to beat them to win later".. The difference is if you face them in the final instead you get a silver, if you face them in the quarter you are out and win nothing. This type of thing happens in every sport in every tournament.
It's just dumb old men who run this thing poorly. Badminton is the only racket sport who does group stages.. and of course it causes problem only for Badminton. Just look at the table tennis tournament, play to win every game or you are out.
|
On August 01 2012 23:48 andrewlt wrote:
There is still a difference to the spectators, though. They could still play a vanilla game where they don't do anything special or don't go all out. Playing so badly that some scrub off the street can beat you is another thing entirely.
Not possible here, Both teams had an incentive to lose. This wasn't even like Naniwa/NesTea, where the result of the game didn't matter at all, this was a case where even a token attempt to get a point could have turned into a victory for your team in the match, and a resulting early loss in the tournament proper.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
