09-26-2011, 12:10 AM #18
BWF has a set pattern for draws. Here is what BWF has laid down in the General Competition Regulations:
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?
09-26-2011, 10:26 AM #19
09-26-2011, 11:37 AM #20
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 11:39 AM.
nokh88 liked this post
09-26-2011, 02:44 PM #21
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.
09-26-2011, 04:39 PM #22
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!
09-26-2011, 04:43 PM #23
"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."
"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 04:45 PM.
viver liked this post
09-26-2011, 05:20 PM #24
09-26-2011, 05:37 PM #25
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 05:44 PM.
09-26-2011, 06:19 PM #26
09-26-2011, 07:01 PM #27
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.
09-26-2011, 07:48 PM #28
09-26-2011, 08:02 PM #29
09-26-2011, 09:42 PM #30
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...
kwun liked this post
09-26-2011, 11:13 PM #31
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.
09-27-2011, 01:13 AM #32
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.
09-27-2011, 01:17 AM #33
All SS tournament is by invitation.
09-27-2011, 02:21 AM #34
By twobeer in forum Rules / Tournament Regulation / OfficiatingReplies: 22: 12-06-2011, 03:32 PM
By taneepak in forum Chit-ChatReplies: 79: 07-29-2011, 07:44 PM
By xymaerts in forum Malaysia Open / Korea Open 2011Replies: 368: 01-30-2011, 10:46 PM
By chris-ccc in forum General ForumReplies: 17: 09-03-2010, 10:13 AM
By Johansen in forum General ForumReplies: 2: 11-16-2004, 05:08 AM