OT Olympic Hypocrisy?

[victoryfactory]

So I'm watching swimming heats the other day. The announcer remarks
that so-and-so is just going fast enough to go through to the next round.

Wait a minute....

It's ok for swimmers and track athletes and basketball teams but not badminton players?

(Sorry if this has been discussed here before)

VF

[e-RICHIE]

So I'm watching swimming heats the other day. The announcer remarks
that so-and-so is just going fast enough to go through to the next round.

Wait a minute....

It's ok for swimmers and track athletes and basketball teams but not badminton players?

(Sorry if this has been discussed here before)

VF
Ya it's probably akin to some how the banned substance list(s) for each and every sport is/are not across-the-board the same atmo.

ps

arrange disorder

:):):)
:rolleyes::rolleyes:;)
:cool::cool::)

[Richard]

The difference is that just going fast enough to get through to the next round does not allow you to define whether your draw in the next round is easier or harder as a result.

[Chance]

One is winning; albeit by a small margin. The other is not. It's throwing a game on purpose. Circumvents the spirit of the rules.

[firerescuefin]

Preserving energy by finishing in a qualifying position is quite a bit different than tanking a match.

[dauwhe]

Anyone who gives less than 110% should be disqualified. The "American Idol" judges get to decide.

:bike:

[bzbvh5]

When swimmers do go just fast enough to make it to the next round, sometimes they didn't go just fast enough and they are eliminated. They are not trying to lose, they are trying not to exert maximum energy. If they lose, they're out.

The badminton players get to go to the next round even if they lose. That's the difference.

I haven't heard any of the fans at the swimming qualifying rounds boo. The booing at the badminton was and embarassment.

[christian]

Sorry, but this is crazy. You're holding the players accountable for the stupid rules of the Badminton World Federation.

If the format were single-elimination, like in, say, tennis (it's another racquet sport, albeit played with a ball and over a lower net), players would be forced to win. In group play, as designed, since they were already through, they could well have forfeited the match for all I care.

The goal of the Olympdics badminton competition is to win a medal, not to compile the most victories in the group stage. Boos or not, notwithstanding.

[William]

The Olympics is out of control!! I say condense it!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6aEW_JLlDE&feature=results_video

"Gymnasts doing their floor routine through a basketball game while javlins and shot puts land all around them"....THAT"S EXCITING!!!!:banana:






;):)
William

[goonster]

The booing at the badminton was and embarassment.
The end result of all this is that the IOC deemed the booing at the venue to be more important than the athletes.

[christian]

The end result of all this is that the IOC deemed the booing at the venue to be more important than the athletes.

[x] Like.

Apparently, the values of amateur sport now include prioritizing paid ticket holders over competitors. I assume the competitors get a healthy cut of the gate though. Wait, what?

[FlashUNC]

What about the Brit track cyclist who intentionally crashed the less-than-perfect start in the team sprint, just because IOC rules allow a restart in that case?

[e-RICHIE]

What about the Brit track cyclist who intentionally crashed the less-than-perfect start in the team sprint, just because IOC rules allow a restart in that case?

I think it's ours sport's rules rather than the IOC's atmo.

ps

arrange disorder

;);):cool:
:cool::):rolleyes:
:rolleyes::):cool:

[Earl Gray]

sorry, but this is crazy. You're holding the players accountable for the stupid rules of the badminton world federation.

If the format were single-elimination, like in, say, tennis (it's another racquet sport, albeit played with a ball and over a lower net), players would be forced to win. In group play, as designed, since they were already through, they could well have forfeited the match for all i care.

The goal of the olympdics badminton competition is to win a medal, not to compile the most victories in the group stage. Boos or not, notwithstanding.

+1

[bzbvh5]

Here is the Olympic Creed: 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.

I don't think the losing games on purpose has anything to do with taking part, struggling, or fighting well. The badminton plays were trying to win a medal which is not the point of the Olympics.

[victoryfactory]

One is winning; albeit by a small margin. The other is not. It's throwing a game on purpose. Circumvents the spirit of the rules.
Nope, the swimmer was trying to finish THIRD

[Rada]

I see values in both points of view. Though I do have to question rules that reward losing and a governing body that could not recognize that it would encourage what happened.

[goonster]

I think it's ours sport's rules rather than the IOC's atmo.
Yes, but if the hoi polloi boo loudly enough, the IOC can make you interpret them in interesting ways.

[Earl Gray]

... The badminton plays were trying to win a medal which is not the point of the Olympics.

Than they should stop awarding them and just give everyone a particapation ribbon.

[bzbvh5]

Than they should stop awarding them and just give everyone a particapation ribbon.

My thoughts exactly.

[Grant McLean]

What about the Brit track cyclist who intentionally crashed the less-than-perfect start in the team sprint, just because IOC rules allow a restart in that case?

Apparently it's within the regulations, but it didn't sit well with me.

I suppose there is no way for officials to differentiate between
intentionally and unintentional crashing, therefore the rule is the rule.

-g

[MattTuck]

I was for IOC's decision to toss the badminton players out of the competition, but I think my view has evolved slightly.

There is obviously some misalignment of incentives in the way the badminton seedings take place. 4 teams were DQ'd, which indicates to me that it was no secret of the screwed up rules, and everyone was trying to game the system.

And, I admit that I do not follow the badminton circuit, it seems like the players should have been speaking out about this flaw long ago. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't, I don't know.

I think it would have been much more powerful and righteous to come out and say ahead of the match, "because of the rules in how we are seeded in the next round, we are not rewarded for putting our best effort forward, and for that reason, rather than go through the motions of a match that we intend to lose, we forfeit this match." Now, there may be reasons they could not do that, I don't know if forfeiting one match excludes you from further competition.

But, the olympics (and life) are about standing up for what you know is right. The players had the opportunity to call out the badminton federation and expose the flawed system; instead they tried to use the flawed system for their best interest. Unethical? no. But they can do better.

[CaptStash]

Actually, it's my understanding that badminton's international governing body threw them out, not the IOC. Most sports have a rule requireing participants to compete, and stating that intentionally losing is against the rules. In rowing (which I have a lot of relatively high level experience with), there is a rule that requires all crews to "race" for the full length of the course. This becomes an issue in a heat where the winner advances, and the others move on to the repechage (second chance heat). Winners well out in front are allowed to ease off, but those out of contention will be disqualified if they ease off soe much that they are no longer racing. It's a fine point, and rarely an issue although I have seen a boat disqualified for just going on the paddle (sort of like walking in a running race) when it was clear they weren't going to win.

I think that disqualifying the badminton players was the right thing to do as they were quite obviously throwing the matches, and making a mockery of the competition. I would further like to see actions taken against their coaches who apparently were the ones who had developed the strategy of losing.

CaptStash....

[victoryfactory]

By setting up the competitions round robin style, It's the sport that
is to blame. They created the possibility of this happening.
Win or go home style would solve this problem, but create others like the unfairness
of seeding making for an early exit of a popular team.

Might as well put judges out there to award style points.

They should stick to the traditional long time true Olympic sports anyway,
Like Women's team handball.

[bcm119]

A lot of the announcer's banter is b.s. though. Watch any of the sports with someone who's actually competed at a high level and they will laugh at the announcers. All I can comment on is cycling and swimming, but I can certainly say that Rowdy Gaines adds a lot of color to the swimming events that may or may not actually be there. There are very few swimmers who have the luxury of giving anything less than 100% effort in the semi finals, and even the ones who have that luxury often go for it anyway to get the best lane assignment. It's not like putting a 100% effort into a 200m event will take any snap out of your performance the next day; the only concern is when semis and finals are back to back within 30 minutes.

[rwsaunders]

I've warned my family, as tomorrow we are having a graduation picnic at our house for our daughter, and if anybody is seen slacking at either volleyball or badminton, there will be hell to pay...and that includes my 86 yo Mother-in-law.:cool:

Yes, I still can't understand why either are Olympic sports, especially beach volleyball.