User Tag List

Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 LastLast
Results 18 to 34 of 203
  1. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    icy cold place
    Posts
    3,778
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I agree the best should play in OLY. CHN has done her homework and produced the best players, her players train and play hard, why punish her?

    As for that Pierre chap '"The most important thing in the Olympic Games is not to win but to take part, just as the most important thing in life is not the triumph but the struggle. The essential thing is not to have conquered but to have fought well." that is well said and some dude will print this message and print on the wall for inspiration/motivation and what-nots, but OTB's take is spare me the struggle as I have enough growing up in poor old MAS, just show me the money' (as Cuba Jr said in the movie Jerry Mcguire) and Vince Lombardi 'winning is not everything, it is the only thing'
    If OTB follows Pierre words, OTB will lose his shirt These Vince and Cuba chaps are OTBs inspirational and motivational guru
    Last edited by OneToughBirdie; 02-19-2014 at 02:21 PM.

  2. #19
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    36
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vixter View Post
    But Cheung is right, Olympics was always meant to be a globally/nationally diverse competition. The five rings represents the five continents. If we are talking about Pierre de Coubertin, I believe his vision was that the Olympics should be strictly for amateurs and not professionals.

    But regarding this maximum quota rule changing from 3 to 2, I don't know, I feel like the rule was fine as it was, why change it? It's quite an impressive sight when a nation manages to make a clean-sweep of the medals. Not saying that's what I would hope for in any sport, but it's an impressive sight, three flags of the same during price ceremony.

    This would probably have happened in 2012
    if not for Wang Xin's sad injury.
    And in 2008 if not for Lu Lan's stage-fright.
    If participation and struggle are important as de Coubertin intended, why does it matter who wins? Other countries are there aren't they? Does it mean they didn't participate because they didn't win? Where is the struggle if best nations are handicapped and the wins handed to you on a silver platter?

    If you'll also allow me to note the self-serving BWF rules. I can't help but notice that only the singles events had their quota shrunk... events where, oh you know, a certain country's advantages are so obvious. If the intention is to have all countries participate, why not limit entries to doubles events as well?

  3. #20
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Outside the box
    Posts
    13,180
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    I agree we want to see the best and we see the best from each NOC under the new changes given some rules.

    As noted there are 5 rings in the Olympic flag.

    If doubles are not limited to the same ruling, then I think that's an inconsistency that puts BWF in a weaker position.

    I had a quick look at table tennis and judo via wikipedia. The restrictions are also 2 from each country. In fact, judo is limited to one person for each weight division.

    So perhaps an olympic committee higher up has spoken to BWF to bring things into line with other sports.

  4. #21
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Outside the box
    Posts
    13,180
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vixter View Post
    But regarding this maximum quota rule changing from 3 to 2, I don't know, I feel like the rule was fine as it was, why change it? It's quite an impressive sight when a nation manages to make a clean-sweep of the medals. Not saying that's what I would hope for in any sport, but it's an impressive sight, three flags of the same during price ceremony.

    Just wondering if any of the other olympic sports have that possibility of one country sweeping all the medals.

  5. #22
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    36
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cheung View Post
    I agree we want to see the best and we see the best from each NOC under the new changes given some rules.

    As noted there are 5 rings in the Olympic flag.

    If doubles are not limited to the same ruling, then I think that's an inconsistency that puts BWF in a weaker position.

    I had a quick look at table tennis and judo via wikipedia. The restrictions are also 2 from each country. In fact, judo is limited to one person for each weight division.

    So perhaps an olympic committee higher up has spoken to BWF to bring things into line with other sports.
    I wouldn't exactly use table tennis as a shining example. Think BWF is embarrassing? ITTF takes the cake. They made so many rule changes to limit the same dominant nation they might as well start a new sport.

    First they changed the size of the ball from 38mm to 40mm, ostensibly so audiences can see it better, which is a joke in itself. If an audience in the stands can't see a 38mm ball, he sure will have almost as much problems seeing a 40mm ball. It did slow down the speed of the ball though. Then they changed the scoring from 5 sets of 21 points to 7 sets of 11, which wildly increased the chances of upsets. Next they changed the servicing rules so players cannot use hands to shield the ball.

    All of these have the cumulative effect of limiting the same nation. Guess what, it didn't work. BWF should not be taking that path. Want to make the game more competitive? Make the other countries competitive.

    I certainly don't see FINA limiting American swimmers, IAAF limiting Jamaican sprinters or the IGF calling for banning wealthy countries so poor countries win at golf. When you're using gimmicks as the BWF is doing, you're already a failed sport. Keep badminton among real sports.

  6. #23
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    icy cold place
    Posts
    3,778
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The ROW simply cannot keep up with CHN in TT and baddy. CHN will adapt and resilient no matter what rules IOC puts out. These 2-player limit is simply unfair and it is clearly to control CHN domination. If ROW cannot beat CHN, then setup rules to screw CHN. I pity CHN TT players who train day in day out, only to get screwed by this stupid rule. Try picking 2 CHN MS from Xu Chen, Ma Long, Zhang Jike, Fan, Yan, any one of these 5 will put the ROW to pasture. On WS: Liu SW current WR1 lost 0-4 to her young comrade Chen Meng in Kuwait Open, I can't imagine how competitive it is in CHN, a WR1 got spanked by a jr player. Squaring of against the ROW is easy, playing against their own comrades can go either way. On the other side, the 2 players who represent CHN in singles will go to the final. OLY gold medal may be the most coveted titile to own, really WC is way harder to win.
    Last edited by OneToughBirdie; 02-20-2014 at 12:39 AM.

  7. #24
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Outside the box
    Posts
    13,180
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    tennis is max four per NOC, athletics is three. So judo is the toughest

  8. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    290
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mindreader View Post
    I wouldn't exactly use table tennis as a shining example. Think BWF is embarrassing? ITTF takes the cake. They made so many rule changes to limit the same dominant nation they might as well start a new sport.

    First they changed the size of the ball from 38mm to 40mm, ostensibly so audiences can see it better, which is a joke in itself. If an audience in the stands can't see a 38mm ball, he sure will have almost as much problems seeing a 40mm ball. It did slow down the speed of the ball though. Then they changed the scoring from 5 sets of 21 points to 7 sets of 11, which wildly increased the chances of upsets. Next they changed the servicing rules so players cannot use hands to shield the ball.

    All of these have the cumulative effect of limiting the same nation. Guess what, it didn't work. BWF should not be taking that path. Want to make the game more competitive? Make the other countries competitive.

    I certainly don't see FINA limiting American swimmers, IAAF limiting Jamaican sprinters or the IGF calling for banning wealthy countries so poor countries win at golf. When you're using gimmicks as the BWF is doing, you're already a failed sport. Keep badminton among real sports.
    I see where you are going with this, mindreader. And you might be right about table tennis, but I doubt that these changes in badminton are done to harm China domination. We have seen similar changes in tennis as well. During the last 10 years there has been a slowing-down of harcourt- and grass-surfaces. New type-3 balls have been introduced that are a little bit bigger (and slower). The result is longer rallies, longer matches, and to make the ball (so they say) more visible for spectators and players. There was no dominant nation to stop, so I am inclined to believe that this is done purely for economic reasons.

    (Please the crowd and sponsors + make the sport more TV-friendly = more $$$$$$)

    The big reason for changing from 5 sets to 7 sets is (I believe) so that the TV stations can have more frequent commercial breaks. I agree it also increases chance of upset, but I don't think that that was the agenda. It's all about the money these days. Want the sport to grow? Satisfy TV-stations, satisfy viewers and sponsors.

  9. #26
    Regular Member AlanY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    4,438
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vixter View Post
    It's all about the money these days. Want the sport to grow? Satisfy TV-stations, satisfy viewers and sponsors.
    So to replace the world No 3 by someone outside the top 100 can achieve that?

  10. #27
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    36
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vixter View Post
    I see where you are going with this, mindreader. And you might be right about table tennis, but I doubt that these changes in badminton are done to harm China domination. We have seen similar changes in tennis as well. During the last 10 years there has been a slowing-down of harcourt- and grass-surfaces. New type-3 balls have been introduced that are a little bit bigger (and slower). The result is longer rallies, longer matches, and to make the ball (so they say) more visible for spectators and players. There was no dominant nation to stop, so I am inclined to believe that this is done purely for economic reasons.

    (Please the crowd and sponsors + make the sport more TV-friendly = more $$$$$$)

    The big reason for changing from 5 sets to 7 sets is (I believe) so that the TV stations can have more frequent commercial breaks. I agree it also increases chance of upset, but I don't think that that was the agenda. It's all about the money these days. Want the sport to grow? Satisfy TV-stations, satisfy viewers and sponsors.
    I don't buy the doing 7 sets for TV sponsorship bit. I'd be more inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt without the previously mentioned rule changes, not to mention some even more onerous ones that I've forgotten, namely, eliminating the short-pip and shockingly, serious discussions on changing the TABLE SIZE. Talk about wow.

    Without getting more off-topic about table tennis, let's talk about badminton. What is BWF hoping to achieve with these quotas, rule changes and limitations. The goal is to increase viewership for badminton right? Well, the sport's penetration is already high in China, Indonesia, Malaysia, South Korea and to more limited extents, Denmark and South Korea. You're not gonna increase viewership significantly in these places. Any gains will be playing at the margin. So I'm guessing they want to increase viewership in other countries.

    With that in mind, by all means tell me how is allowing weaker players gonna accomplish that role. I'm guessing even an all China final between Chen Long and Lin Dan will be FAR more interest than Lin Dan thrashing whichever player who shouldn't be there. How is such a showing supposed to increase viewership in countries when it produces lopsided victories instead of demonstrating the best the sport has to offer?

  11. #28
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    290
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AlanY View Post
    So to replace the world No 3 by someone outside the top 100 can achieve that?
    Lol no I don't think so. I was comparing some changes in table tennis to similar changes in tennis, and how at least in tennis they were certainly not made to stop a country's domination.

    Quote Originally Posted by mindreader View Post
    I don't buy the doing 7 sets for TV sponsorship bit. I'd be more inclined to give you the benefit of the doubt without the previously mentioned rule changes, not to mention some even more onerous ones that I've forgotten, namely, eliminating the short-pip and shockingly, serious discussions on changing the TABLE SIZE. Talk about wow.

    Without getting more off-topic about table tennis, let's talk about badminton. What is BWF hoping to achieve with these quotas, rule changes and limitations. The goal is to increase viewership for badminton right? Well, the sport's penetration is already high in China, Indonesia, Malaysia, South Korea and to more limited extents, Denmark and South Korea. You're not gonna increase viewership significantly in these places. Any gains will be playing at the margin. So I'm guessing they want to increase viewership in other countries.

    With that in mind, by all means tell me how is allowing weaker players gonna accomplish that role. I'm guessing even an all China final between Chen Long and Lin Dan will be FAR more interest than Lin Dan thrashing whichever player who shouldn't be there. How is such a showing supposed to increase viewership in countries when it produces lopsided victories instead of demonstrating the best the sport has to offer?
    I don't know what the goal is with this rule change in quotation. And like I said, I am also not for it. I think it was fine as it was. Assuming the rankings stay the same, Wang Shixian could once again miss out on Olympic participation.

    But nations can still send 2, so nothing is stopping a final between Lin Dan and Chen Long, assuming they both qualify. Either way the quality of badminton would certainly not be affected in the latter stages. All the "scrubs" get beaten in round 1.

  12. #29
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    came from the SAR
    Posts
    3,786
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    If China haven't won all 5 gold medals in London, we would not be having this discussion.

  13. #30
    Regular Member AlanY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    4,438
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    for the winter olympics in Russia going on now,

    Netherlands has won Gold, Silver and bronze for the Men's 500m, 5,000m & 10,000m and Ladies 1,500m in speed skating.

    Only yesterday France got Gold, Silver and bronze for Men's Ski Cross.

    wonder when and how the olympics committee going to change the rules to level the playing field.

  14. #31
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    icy cold place
    Posts
    3,778
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pcll99 View Post
    If China haven't won all 5 gold medals in London, we would not be having this discussion.
    Agree with you. Whatever this OLY symbols stands for, I look from the side of the players who devoted their lifetime training for this OLY moment, they (say CHN TT and badminton players) are the world's best but because the ROW cannot compete against them and along come some nuts who imposed rules barring them from competing, that is sinful and criminal. These nuts just destroy someone's dream.

  15. #32
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Outside the box
    Posts
    13,180
    Mentioned
    33 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mindreader View Post
    .....
    Without getting more off-topic about table tennis, let's talk about badminton. What is BWF hoping to achieve with these quotas, rule changes and limitations. The goal is to increase viewership for badminton right? Well, the sport's penetration is already high in China, Indonesia, Malaysia, South Korea and to more limited extents, Denmark and South Korea. You're not gonna increase viewership significantly in these places. Any gains will be playing at the margin. So I'm guessing they want to increase viewership in other countries.

    With that in mind, by all means tell me how is allowing weaker players gonna accomplish that role.
    I'm guessing even an all China final between Chen Long and Lin Dan will be FAR more interest than Lin Dan thrashing whichever player who shouldn't be there. How is such a showing supposed to increase viewership in countries when it produces lopsided victories instead of demonstrating the best the sport has to offer?
    Refer you back to post #15 of this thread.

  16. #33
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    290
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by OneToughBirdie View Post
    Agree with you. Whatever this OLY symbols stands for, I look from the side of the players who devoted their lifetime training for this OLY moment, they (say CHN TT and badminton players) are the world's best but because the ROW cannot compete against them and along come some nuts who imposed rules barring them from competing, that is sinful and criminal. These nuts just destroy someone's dream.
    3rd ranked China MS is Wang Zhengming...

    No, but seriously, I agree with you. If the purpose of this rule really is to limit China domination, then that's a very shameful move. I'm just not totally convinced yet. Why only in singles then? Why not have this limitation for WD and XD, where China domination is arguably even stronger than in singles.

  17. #34
    Regular Member AlanY's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    England
    Posts
    4,438
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vixter View Post
    3rd ranked China MS is Wang Zhengming...

    No, but seriously, I agree with you. If the purpose of this rule really is to limit China domination, then that's a very shameful move. I'm just not totally convinced yet. Why only in singles then? Why not have this limitation for WD and XD, where China domination is arguably even stronger than in singles.
    they'd taken care of the doubles last time round

Page 2 of 12 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 LastLast

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
  •