Results 375 to 385 of 385
08-06-2012, 10:29 AM #375
Fair play (actually I mean something broader here) is more than important in this case, it is actually a concept that is codified in the rules regarding players conduct. Yes such rules can be applied with some flexibility but the actions of the WDs went way beyond the tolerance levels. Furthermore they were warned that their actions were unacceptable and they were warned so in no uncertain terms. So yet another reason why morality doesn't factor here is because despite what some people seem to believe, there is actually very clear language in the rules pertaining to the actions the women took.
However, I would say trying to get a better draw is fair game; everyone wants it and can attain it (depends on how hard they try to lose)
08-06-2012, 10:55 AM #376
Pay specific attention to points 4.1.1 and 4.5. The women's actions made them vulnerable to either one or both of those clauses. For good measure throw in the last sentence or so of 5.1.
Last edited by thunder.tw; 08-06-2012 at 10:57 AM.
08-06-2012, 11:22 AM #377
08-06-2012, 05:33 PM #378
I just wonder if badminton has set a precedence for Olympics in terms of sportsmanship or maybe IOC are just trying not to be blatantly hypocritical
08-06-2012, 09:15 PM #379
So are you saying the news are wrong? That's what really get me confused...
08-06-2012, 10:28 PM #380
I agree that it's a bit confusing. Here's my GUESS:
KOR was hiding their true intention of setting up both WYL/YY together with TQ/ZYL in the top half of the draw.
If JKE/KHN lost against WZL/YY, I reckon, HJE/KMJ would have won against INA's PG/JM.
An automatic SF for KOR in a relatively weak group. Sure, they would have to sacrifice JKE/KHN but the KOR WD2 pair's chances weren't very good anyway.
When WZL/YY were 'successful' in losing against JKE/KHN, HJE/KMJ wanted to lose against INA in order to avoid WZL/YY in the QF.
Bottomline, both of them don't want to be in the same half as CHN.
In the surface, KOR wanted to lose BOTH matches in order to avoid meeting each other in the QF (as what they ave released to the press); quite similar to YY's 'injury excuse'. Sly sly girls... shame on them for speaking in forked tongue. hehehe.
I can't fully blame em though. I believe 80% of the blame is on the organizer. Stupid format.
08-07-2012, 06:04 AM #381
08-07-2012, 07:23 AM #382
08-10-2012, 11:04 AM #383
badminton vs chess tactical play
funny it makes chessbase.
while chess players typically do not throw games, but has been done in past, they do tend to play safe for draws
this is not appealing to the audience as the draws are short or just home-based computer preparation.
Last edited by pwimsey; 08-10-2012 at 11:09 AM.
08-10-2012, 11:37 AM #384
08-14-2012, 10:56 PM #385
Strategy a must to achieve victory
(Another view from a reader)
From Dudley Au
04:45 AM Aug 15, 2012
I refer to the commentary "Playing to lose is smart, not an Olympic scandal" (Aug 13) on the ejected women's badminton doubles players.
They had qualified for the next round, which opened the door for the teams to find the best route for their country. This would have only protected the players from unnecessary fatigue.
Every athlete has to use judgment in pacing to achieve the best chance for ultimate victory. It is akin to chess, where one would sacrifice a piece or pieces to win. A long-distance runner would also hold back before making a final spurt.
It is not cheating nor dishonesty but a strategy to conserve energy in whatever sporting endeavour. A limited resource is being rationally directed towards a goal, an earnest attempt to succeed.
It is the same with pecuniary matters: One does not extend beyond one's means. One has to control one's finances, so that it is not exhausted before the goal is reached.
In that sense, the players' actions should not have been faulted by the sport's authority. There is a dichotomy between the ideal, that the human body is unlimited, and the pragmatic path. The former sounds great, but pragmatism brings home the gold.
If the goal of competing athletes and countries is to win, then there must be focus.
To entertain the crowd is secondary, not primary. To win and break records would entertain spectators, but this would occur when resources are planned to peak at the right time.
This is the pivot around which success and talent revolve. It would be hyperbole to believe otherwise.
Last edited by Loh; 08-14-2012 at 10:58 PM.