Putting the "Bad" in badminton

[altai_rose]

Just because you want to bring the class average down doesn't mean you should write, "Kiss my ass" to every exam question, ya know?

Well, actually... I think in our situation, there was a lot of resentment against the administration for wasting our time and yeah, some of the random answer box checking was done in retaliation because we knew the administrators would be looking at the scores and comparing them to previous years. (Previous years had a different curriculum format and the administrators were trying to compare scores between years to see whether there was any change in classes taking the new versus old curriculum). Personally, I stayed the entire 3-4 hours and tried to answer every question well... but that certainly was NOT the norm for my class.

Now that I've watched some highlights of the badminton game, I guess the badminton players should have tried harder to play a good "losing match" then... Nonetheless, I still think the disqualification was too harsh.

[Seerek]

In the Japan women's football example, their third game in the group stage vs. South Africa was happening at the exact same time as the Canada-Sweden game, so Japan's supposed decision to "tie" their game intentionally was not influenced directly by the results of the CAN-SWE game.

It appears that Japan wanted to finish 2nd in Group E to play Great Britain in the quarter-final and avoid Brazil, but Brazil also finished 2nd in the Group Stage. Therefore, Japan now plays Brazil in the quarters when they could have played France instead (i.e. their decision actually backfired).


Interestingly, the Year-end championships for Mens and Women's tennis also starts with 4 participant round-robins, and there have been some suspicions of "tanking" 3rd matches for semi-final positioning as well.

In the badminton example, it is odd that they did not "promote" the 2nd place finishers in the 2 non-affected group (B and D) to other parts of the quarterfinal brackets so that they could play the 3rd/4th place finishers in the affected groups (A and C) in the quarter-final. Having the 0-3 and 1-2 teams in Round-Robin play each other for semi-final spots when some 2-1 teams ended up being eliminated today in the quarter-final just seems odd.

[jlai]

speaking of trying to lose, I now remember my economics teacher, as part of the lesson on wrong incentives, relating that hilarious match, Barbados vs. Grenada match in 1994, with each side trying to kick the ball into their own goal

http://www.snopes.com/sports/soccer/barbados.asp

[Anita18]

speaking of trying to lose, I now remember my economics teacher, as part of the lesson on wrong incentives, relating that hilarious match, Barbados vs. Grenada match in 1994, with each side trying to kick the ball into their own goal

http://www.snopes.com/sports/soccer/barbados.asp

[Anita18]

In the Japan women's football example, their third game in the group stage vs. South Africa was happening at the exact same time as the Canada-Sweden game, so Japan's supposed decision to "tie" their game intentionally was not influenced directly by the results of the CAN-SWE game.

It appears that Japan wanted to finish 2nd in Group E to play Great Britain in the quarter-final and avoid Brazil, but Brazil also finished 2nd in the Group Stage. Therefore, Japan now plays Brazil in the quarters when they could have played France instead (i.e. their decision actually backfired).

Maybe players should stop doing these kinds of things.

[DimaToe]

It appears that Japan wanted to finish 2nd in Group E to play Great Britain in the quarter-final and avoid Brazil, but Brazil also finished 2nd in the Group Stage. Therefore, Japan now plays Brazil in the quarters when they could have played France instead (i.e. their decision actually backfired).

PML

[manhn]

I didn't have a problem with the badminton players either. It's no different when a skater/team has a large lead after the SP and then skates a watered down LP/FD. Granted, it's not as blatant as the badminton players but where's the line?

Honestly, I'm surprised it's taken this long for TPTB to realize how problematic these round robin/playoff structures can be.

[flipforsynchro]

I wish they could've come up with more creative ways of trying to lose. You can only hit it into the net so many times before it gets blehh.

[Gazpacho]

Okay, I understand the decision now. Not using one's best efforts to win is indeed against the official rules. (Go to the second box, Section 1B, Appendix 4 "Players' Code of Conduct".) So the disqualification was justified.

[Angelskates]

The Chinese who were disqualified, and now also expelled, have just announced they are quitting the sport. Not surprising, they shamed their country by not only deliberately breaking the rules, but by stupidly announcing to the media after the match, that they didn't try. (That's why they did not appeal and just accepted the ban.)

They broke two rules, actually, basically not trying to win, and making the sport look bad.

[tchaikovsky_177]

That is what it was. They introduced the round robin for this Olympics as a lot of other sports do it. However these teams are obviously not too smart if they thought throwing matches really badly was going to give them an easy path to the finals.

That's actually not quite true

it's true that all team sports (soccer, basketball, hockey, volleyball, water-polo, handball), which have always functioned under a round robin format. But these sports function in a way that's fundamentally different from non-team sports and the only non-team sport I can think of that uses the round robin format is beach volleyball.

The following all use knockout tournament:

Archery
Badminton (until this year)
Boxing
Fencing
Judo
Table Tennis
Taekwondo
Tennis
Wrestling

Rightfully so, most sports still use a knockout format, because the round robin format will always be flawed to some extent.

The badminton federation's round robin system at the Olympics is a complete mess.

http://www.london2012.com/badminton/...es/groups.html

As you can see here, there are 16 groups, of which 7 groups have 2 players and 9 groups have 3 players That is NOT how round robin is supposed to work. On the women's side, out of 16 groups, 14 groups have 3 players and 2 groups have 2 players. Again, mess. I'm pretty sure after this they'll go back to knockout format like they should.

And as someone pointed out earlier, the way the drew the QFs was a joke. They should have reseeded the teams who were 2nd in their groups so that the four teams that were legitimately 1st/2nd in their groups would each draw one of the lucky 3rd/4th place finisher teams in the QF. Seeing the 3rd/4th place teams battle for QF spots was just ridiculous!

[bek]

The athletes were stupid and they went against the rules. But the Badminton fed is ultimately responsible. They are the ones who made it that it was more beneficial to lose than to win. That's an awful position to put the athletes in.

And I'm worried about the Chinese team. Essentially from what i understand if they "won" they'd have to face their Chinese teammates and then China wouldn't end up with gold/silver like they were expected. Who wants to downright bet that they were ordered to do so as well. Now they are quitting etc.

[allezfred]

Oh but then it wouldn't be as much fun for us. However I think those people who paid good money to see the competition would rightfully be peeved off.

Actually I read some comments from those who attended that match and they said it was the best 40 pounds they had ever spent and they'd be able to say that they were there!

Plus I believe they actually got to see a lot of other matches in the same session.

[Angelskates]

The athletes were stupid and they went against the rules. But the Badminton fed is ultimately responsible.

No, it isn't. Don't like the rules? Don't play. But don't blame not liking the rules for getting consequences for breaking them. It's not the federation's fault - the athletes knew (or should have known) the rules, and deliberately broke them. The Olympics is not the place to make a statement about getting the rules changed, unless these athletes actually think it was worth the bad press and getting expelled for the remote chance the rules might be changed next time, and I highly, highly doubt that. They thought they could get away with it; they couldn't. That's the risk they took.

[pilgrimsoul]

This may not be a popular opinion and I hope no one is offended by it, but it is distressing to see conduct like this at the Olympic Games of all sporting events. The Games are supposed to be a display of all that is best about sport, i.e., athletes behaving in a sportsmanlike manner and trying their very best. So far in this Games, I see a lot more ugliness and bad sportsmanship than demonstration of Olympic ideals and this is very disheartening to me. I've always loved the Games and what they stand for, but the cynical attitude of winning at all costs by cheating and gaming the system has corrupted them and I think we are all poorer in spirit for it.

Besides the fact that what these athletes did was unethical and clearly a violation of the rules, I don't understand how they would really benefit from it. Wouldn't they eventually have to face the tougher teams they're trying to avoid anyway as the tournament progresses?

[Seerek]

Besides the fact that what these athletes did was unethical and clearly a violation of the rules, I don't understand how they would really benefit from it. Wouldn't they eventually have to face the tougher teams they're trying to avoid anyway as the tournament progresses?

You are correct in that the top seeds would eventually play each other, but
in the later stages, the medalists are essentially already decided (they just need to figure out with colour each team will end up receiving after the semifinal and the final).

The dilemma and the thought process was this:

If you play a tougher team in the quarter-final round and you lose, there is no longer a chance for a medal - you are completely eliminated from the competition.

Compare that to the situation should you win the quarter-final. Even if you lose the semi-final, you'll still have a chance for a medal by competing in the bronze medal game.

[bek]

No, it isn't. Don't like the rules? Don't play. But don't blame not liking the rules for getting consequences for breaking them. It's not the federation's fault - the athletes knew (or should have known) the rules, and deliberately broke them. The Olympics is not the place to make a statement about getting the rules changed, unless these athletes actually think it was worth the bad press and getting expelled for the remote chance the rules might be changed next time, and I highly, highly doubt that. They thought they could get away with it; they couldn't. That's the risk they took.

You realize that their federation maybe might have told them to throw the meet so China could 1-2. There's talk they have orders on who can finish first and second between the two..

[pilgrimsoul]

You are correct in that the top seeds would eventually play each other, but
in the later stages, the medalists are essentially already decided (they just need to figure out with colour each team will end up receiving after the semifinal and the final).

The dilemma and the thought process was this:

If you play a tougher team in the quarter-final round and you lose, there is no longer a chance for a medal - you are completely eliminated from the competition.

Compare that to the situation should you win the quarter-final. Even if you lose the semi-final, you'll still have a chance for a medal by competing in the bronze medal game.

Thanks for explaining how this works, Seerek.

[Garden Kitty]

Another funny article about the incident.

[Anita18]

You realize that their federation maybe might have told them to throw the meet so China could 1-2. There's talk they have orders on who can finish first and second between the two..

The point is that (I hope) nobody told them they had to throw the meet THAT badly. Even my mom was unsurprised about the strategy, but was surprised that the coaches let them "play" in such a fashion.

She would have told us to be more clever and tricky about it.