User Tag List

Page 2 of 24 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... LastLast
Results 18 to 34 of 392
  1. #18
    Moderator cobalt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Arrakis
    Posts
    8,905
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    BWF has a set pattern for draws. Here is what BWF has laid down in the General Competition Regulations:
    http://www.bwfbadminton.org/file_download.aspx?id=35800

    Go to page 11, read Table 1 or 2 as applicable. For 32 main draw entries, Table 2 states:
    #1 seed placed 1, #2 seed placed 32
    It appears that #3 and #4 can be placed either at places 9 or 24.
    It also appears that #5 is placed 5, #6 is placed 13, #7 is placed 20 and #8 is placed 28, or that any of these are interchangeable.

    In the case of the recently concluded Japan Open, LD was seeded 2, Chen Jin seeded 6, Du Pengyu seeded 8 and Chen Long seeded 4, all meeting in the bottom half.

    In the China Masters, #2, 3, 5 and 8 were in the bottom half.

    In the Singapore Open, #2, 4, 5 & 6 were in the bottom half.

    There is no consistency with allocation of places to seeds. Does anyone know the rationale or logic behind this?

  2. #19
    Regular Member Mark A's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    St Helens, UK
    Posts
    4,714
    Mentioned
    27 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by raymond View Post
    Perhaps from countries like China's perspective, it's really not about an individual; it's about the country. If it were the Finals, I'm not sure if they'd care who' win. But if it were not, there seems to be tactical reason. Is this wrong? If you think it's, care to explain/describe why?
    Nail on the head. From what little I know, a Chinese athlete doesn't win for his/herself; the win for China. When you combine this with China's ubiquity and dominance in badminton... recipe for disaster. I will claim till the day I die that Lin Dan threw the 2008 All England to get Chen Jin into the Olympics (and that the Chen repaid the favour in their Olympic semi-final); it's entirely possible that they're contriving (conspiring?) to get Chen Long in next year.

  3. #20
    Regular Member chris-ccc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    26,844
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Wink Now, hit me with your boogie sticks, if you do not agree with my comments

    .
    If our BCers' posts (above) are correct, then BWF should disallow China to send more than 4 entries in each of the 5 events (MS, WS, MD, WD and XD) at tournaments.

    If BWF should allow China to send more than 4 entries per event, surely we would expect whenever there are CHN-vs-CHN matches, there will be some "No match/Walkovers".

    It can be seen that China will continue to organise 'match-fixing' whenever there are CHN-vs-CHN matches.

    I am against this type of CHN behaviour.

    It is no surprise that China wish to win titles; But to win titles by disallowing their players to perform their very best whenever there are CHN-vs-CHN matches, it can be perceived that CBA is only interested in promoting Badminton as an 'artificial' sport.

    Now, hit me with your boogie sticks, if you do not agree with my comments.
    .
    Last edited by chris-ccc; 09-26-2011 at 12:39 PM.

  4. #21
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    3,992
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by chris-ccc View Post
    .
    If our BCers' posts (above) are correct, then BWF should disallow China to send more than 4 entries in each of the 5 events (MS, WS, MD, WD and XD) at tournaments.

    If BWF should allow China to send more than 4 entries per event, surely we would expect whenever there are CHN-vs-CHN matches, there will be some "No match/Walkovers".

    It can be seen that China will continue to organise 'match-fixing' whenever there are CHN-vs-CHN matches.

    I am against this type of CHN behaviour.

    It is no surprise that China wish to win titles; But to win titles by disallowing their players to perform their very best whenever there are CHN-vs-CHN matches, it can be perceived that CBA is only interested in promoting Badminton as an 'artificial' sport.

    Now, hit me with your boogie sticks, if you do not agree with my comments.
    .
    Even with 4 entries match fixing could be advantageous if these four players advance and meet in the draw.

    Only way to do "country" matches in individual cup-draws is to not allow more than 2 players per country into the draw, and mandate that these always are put on opposite halves. Then of course it would be unfair to individiual athletes from countries like china with many great players.. But I guess it is dependent on how the competition should be viewed.. If it is a competetion between Countries/federations (much like the olympics tend to be, counting "golds" for each country etc.) or if it is a competition between individual athletes.

  5. #22
    Regular Member V1lau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    West Coast
    Posts
    375
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Just an idea I am throwing out; maybe they should let the athlete(s) who lost originally to the person who withdrew, to advance and play instead of giving a walkover!

  6. #23
    Regular Member V1lau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    West Coast
    Posts
    375
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Default

    Me
    "As long as many top players are associated with a national body and not a true professional athlete, I think these alleged match fixing incidents will continue to be part of badminton. I am not sure there is a good way to penalize match fixer without harming athletes that are genuinely hurt other than making them professional and accountable to their own bank accounts."

    Kwun
    "why does associated with a national body make someone not a true professional? do we have a definition "professional athlete" somewhere?"


    My statement was vague after reading it again. I meant "independent" rather than "true".
    Last edited by V1lau; 09-26-2011 at 05:45 PM.

  7. #24
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,752
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I 'FULLY' agree with you. BWF should have a set of rules for China and another one for the rest, since China is the ONLY one doing it.


    Quote Originally Posted by chris-ccc View Post
    .
    If our BCers' posts (above) are correct, then BWF should disallow China to send more than 4 entries in each of the 5 events (MS, WS, MD, WD and XD) at tournaments.

    If BWF should allow China to send more than 4 entries per event, surely we would expect whenever there are CHN-vs-CHN matches, there will be some "No match/Walkovers".

    It can be seen that China will continue to organise 'match-fixing' whenever there are CHN-vs-CHN matches.

    I am against this type of CHN behaviour.

    It is no surprise that China wish to win titles; But to win titles by disallowing their players to perform their very best whenever there are CHN-vs-CHN matches, it can be perceived that CBA is only interested in promoting Badminton as an 'artificial' sport.

    Now, hit me with your boogie sticks, if you do not agree with my comments.
    .

  8. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    3,992
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by V1lau View Post
    Just an idea I am throwing out; maybe they should let the athlete(s) who lost originally to the person who withdrew, to advance and play instead of giving a walkover!
    Interesting idea. but I am afraid it would not make much difference.. Then the team just let them "play" a "fixed" match, and loose by a huge margin, or loose in "warmup" way so the "choosen" player gets an easy win. It would depend on "review borads" and such to try to decide if the match seems fixed or not and then take actions.. I do not think this would work very well..

    But I think the idea of letting the eliminated player progress if WO occurs is a great idea anyway I think (even if it does not help the match-fixin issue). As the spectators would have the chanse of seeing a match instead of a non-played game..And maybe players would like an "extra life" sometimes in the tournament :-) Problem would be with rating points calculation etc based on progression of course...
    Last edited by twobeer; 09-26-2011 at 06:44 PM.

  9. #26
    Regular Member V1lau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    West Coast
    Posts
    375
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twobeer View Post
    ..And maybe players would like an "extra life" sometimes in the tournament :-) Problem would be with rating points calculation etc based on progression of course...
    My original thought was the prize money allocation being the the problem.

  10. #27
    Regular Member nokh88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Malaysia
    Posts
    9,047
    Mentioned
    10 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Then the losing player who is financially better off may ask and pay the winning guy to do a walkover and allow him to play. Prize money in badminton is peanuts.

  11. #28
    Regular Member chris-ccc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    26,844
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by twobeer View Post
    Even with 4 entries match fixing could be advantageous if these four players advance and meet in the draw.
    .
    True. Just as it happened last week at the 2011 Japan Open SS;

    Quote Originally Posted by chris-ccc View Post
    At the 2011 Japan Open SS, CHN had (in the Singles events);

    * Womens Singles: Only 4 entries.

    http://www.tournamentsoftware.com/sp...5FD6196&draw=4

    * Mens Singles: Only 5 entries.

    http://www.tournamentsoftware.com/sp...5FD6196&draw=2

    And there was only once in the Womens Singles there was a CHN-vs-CHN match, but it ended as a "No Match".

    There were only twice in the Mens Singles there were CHN-vs-CHN matches, and one ended as a "No Match".


    If China do not want their players to face each other at tournaments, then they should not send many entries.
    .
    Last edited by chris-ccc; 09-26-2011 at 08:53 PM.

  12. #29
    Regular Member chris-ccc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
    Posts
    26,844
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by viver View Post
    I 'FULLY' agree with you. BWF should have a set of rules for China and another one for the rest, since China is the ONLY one doing it.
    .
    No way... If BWF is to bring in a new rule, that rule should apply to ALL countries.

    You never know, other countries could follow China's way, if given the opportunity.
    .

  13. #30
    Moderator cobalt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Arrakis
    Posts
    8,905
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    To be fair to China: you can't fault them if they are the strongest team in the world, and almost undisputed champs in every tournament. The other countries have allowed China to get away through complacency, bad management, corruption, lack of initiative, infighting, insufficient funding, short-sightedness etc etc.

    You can't talk of creating rules to specifically restrict the participation of one country. That is unfair, and it would ultimately harm the sport. Besides, it won't fly; that's like cutting your nose to spite your face and BWF will not do it.

    You can't arbitrarily work out a placement for seeded players to attempt to artificially restrict China's dominance. You are doing the sort of underhanded thing you accuse them of; and giving them the moral right to go on doing the stuff you hate so much.

    But in all of the above, the actions contemplated are reactive. They do not address the root problem at all. And the root problem is that BWF has set up a bunch of regulations and laws and strictures with enough loopholes to give anyone with notions of world dominance, the option to indulge in some shady moves.

    BWF have not yet thought of a way to nullify the effects of walkovers. Even though they are aware that it is all preparatory to OG seedings/rankings, they have not had the foresight to set up a completely independent system for eligibility. How difficult is it to work that out? Will they have something failsafe prepared for the OG 2016?

    The more I think about it, I am beginning to believe: China is not the problem. China is the symptom, or maybe the by-product of the problem. Though of course, you can't say you're not at fault for doing something wrong, just because someone else tempted you. You have to take ownership for your actions...

  14. #31
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,752
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think you are being funny.

    As far as I know, when this 'strategy' was being used by the powerhouse(s), China was not a member of the IBF and an unknown power in badminton . It's really interesting that you say other countries could follow China.

    Having said that, it does not mean I agree with any manipulations - with concrete evidence, of the results.


    Quote Originally Posted by chris-ccc View Post
    .
    No way... If BWF is to bring in a new rule, that rule should apply to ALL countries.

    You never know, other countries could follow China's way, if given the opportunity.
    .

  15. #32
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    HK
    Posts
    925
    Mentioned
    3 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I can think of four solutions :

    1) To limit each country's participation, so tournaments clearly becomes team-orientated. It might seems unfair to powerhouses like CHN, but if tourneys are team events, then one nation = x slot given is the only just and workable rule. After all, the one arguing that nations contests, not individuals, are CHN's management.

    2) When a player WO, the next two tourneys are close for him. This does not prevent match-fixing, but it is still better then nothing.

    3) Organize a "club league", one league with team events (like a surdiman cup that would last a whole year). And then once a year, a WC for individual competition.
    This last solution is interesting. We see something similar in tennis, with the regular tourneys and the fed cup. Some countries value more the individual tourneys and do not know much about team event, and some other countries focus on the fed cup (I know in France people pay more attention to fed cup then individual tourneys, even Grand Slam).
    The problems is that it ask for so much work from the BWF! I am afraid it is beyond their capabilities.

    4) Stay with the present rules and rely on morality, that is, shame. It is then the public's responsability to shame the bad people : if CHN team (or any other) don't play according to rules, then BOO them everytime they play (including other disciplines). The team has to bear responsibility, as it is the team that cheat.
    Perhaps some would think this is not enough. On the contrary, it is more powerful then any rule. If those national organizations do cheat for glory it means they are subject to shame (shame and glory go together). If a team get Boo everywhere, heads would roll, including very successful one like LYB.
    But to implement such a collective behavior there is nothing else to do but sharing our opinions and voicing them.

  16. #33
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    n/a
    Posts
    425
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    All SS tournament is by invitation.

  17. #34
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    singapore
    Posts
    3,333
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yoppy View Post
    Just came back from Indonesia, they told me: thefts are always one step ahead of the police. That's in the context of corporate or business security. The problem with badminton, there is no police, it almost does not exist. So no wonder, the crime continues.
    Haven t you heard of police being paid in many different ways by the syndicate so the police can protect them and their actions?

Page 2 of 24 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. The Walkover Issue
    By twobeer in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / Officiating
    Replies: 22
    : 12-06-2011, 04:32 PM
  2. Replies: 79
    : 07-29-2011, 08:44 PM
  3. Lin Dan walkover in MO
    By xymaerts in forum Malaysia Open / Korea Open 2011
    Replies: 368
    : 01-30-2011, 11:46 PM
  4. Replies: 17
    : 09-03-2010, 11:13 AM
  5. Rights of pictures on BC
    By Johansen in forum General Forum
    Replies: 2
    : 11-16-2004, 06:08 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •