Olympic Disqualification-Snoop King?

The Oriential bad mitten players accused of "not using one's best efforts to win" and "conducting oneself in a manner that is clearly abusive or detrimental to the sport." were disqualified from Olympic games by the “Committee”. Using their logic, should a golfer be disqualified for laying up rather than going long? Should Ali have been disqualified for rope adoping. Once again on the World stage the Oriental Wisdom has once again proven in Sports as in Politico, that the Ancient Truth is far superior to the Beast’s Word. But Understanding is Supreme.
news.xinhuanet.com
But in unrelated news, the hip-hop rapster Snoop Dogg has laid it down, and has picked it up asSnoop King, the resurrected Bob Marley. Whileheld that a living dog is better than a dead lion, apparently Snoop had da revelation as some that it is better live as a just man than die being a fool. Eh brother, am I lyin? Anytiwas, this ganja 520 is for you and all that you do friend, can’t wait to hear da preacher's words of da Wonder.
www.cbsnews.com

AZO said:

-- Should Ali have been disqualified for rope adoping.

Click to expand...

Ali didn't use the tactic to get himself a weaker opponent in his next match, your example is flawed. The Olympics committee was dead right to disqualify the badminton players who cheated.

laying up in golf is a method to try and get the lowest score based on your ability, the lie and how far to the hole.

Ali used rope-a-dope as a tactic to win fights. Not throw them.

Your examples are invalid. Chines were throwing the match on purpose.

mike2810 said:

laying up in golf is a method to try and get the lowest score based on your ability, the lie and how far to the hole.

Ali used rope-a-dope as a tactic to win fights. Not throw them.

Your examples are invalid. Chines were throwing the match on purpose.

Click to expand...

It was one Chinese team, two South Korean and one Indonesian

Therefore example was inductive, using the abstract example of the Ali who would cover himself against the rope and allowing his opponent to score uncontested points, which some might say that refusing to box by covering up was “conducting oneself in a manner that is clearly abusive or detrimental to the sport." However, the result was that Ali allow his opponents to wear themselves out which gave him the physical advantage in the later rounds, which he won by doing so.

But then again, those who subscribe to the rule of law never allow principle to interfer with their intepretation of the facts. I mean you do believe in the rule of law right? Or would my reasoning be in error?

AZO said:

The Oriential bad mitten players accused of "not using one's best efforts to win" and "conducting oneself in a manner that is clearly abusive or detrimental to the sport." were disqualified from Olympic games by the “Committee”. Using their logic, should a golfer be disqualified for laying up rather than going long? Should Ali have been disqualified for rope adoping. Once again on the World stage the Oriental Wisdom has once again proven in Sports as in Politico, that the Ancient Truth is far superior to the Beast’s Word. But Understanding is Supreme.
news.xinhuanet.com
But in unrelated news, the hip-hop rapster Snoop Dogg has laid it down, and has picked it up asSnoop King, the resurrected Bob Marley. Whileheld that a living dog is better than a dead lion, apparently Snoop had da revelation as some that it is better live as a just man than die being a fool. Eh brother, am I lyin? Anytiwas, this ganja 520 is for you and all that you do friend, can’t wait to hear da preacher's words of da Wonder.
www.cbsnews.com

Click to expand...

Now I can read it. . .

Lord Tammerlain said:

It was one Chinese team, two South Korean and one Indonesian

Click to expand...

your correct. I was being lazy in responding to AZO.

I must confess I don't understand this concept of deliberately losing to "receive a more favorable draw." Badmitten is a very strange sport.

DiAnna said:

I must confess I don't understand this concept of deliberately losing to "receive a more favorable draw." Badmitten is a very strange sport.

Click to expand...

"Bad Mitten" is what I used to call my kitten when he was naughty. :mrgreen:

As well as playing to lose and avoid the tougher team in the draw, the Chinese were also playing to avoid the other Chinese team so they didn't meet until the final stages, knocking one of them out.

Infinite Chaos said:

Ali didn't use the tactic to get himself a weaker opponent in his next match, your example is flawed. The Olympics committee was dead right to disqualify the badminton players who cheated.

Click to expand...

Conserving energy in early heats is NORMAL in many olympic sports and should NOT be viewed as cheating. If you look at REALITY, is it not VERY odd that TIRED swimmers/runners in later rounds score BETTER times than those same FRESH and RESTED swimmers/runners scored in the preliminary races? When presented with a schedule of opponenets one forms a strategy for use of their "best" efforts, this is done by ALL teams/individuals, expecially the USA basketball players, which lay back and conserve energy (and use less talented players) until they NEED to turn it up a bit. It is foolish to waste energy, risk injury and go all out when it gains you NOTHING toward the ultimate goal of winning the gold. This is not CHEATING it is common sense coaching.

ttwtt78640 said:

Conserving energy in early heats is NORMAL in many olympic sports and should NOT be viewed as cheating. If you look at REALITY, is it not VERY odd that TIRED swimmers/runners in later rounds score BETTER times than those same FRESH and RESTED swimmers/runners scored in the preliminary races? When presented with a schedule of opponenets one forms a strategy for use of their "best" efforts, this is done by ALL teams/individuals, expecially the USA basketball players, which lay back and conserve energy (and use less talented players) until they NEED to turn it up a bit. It is foolish to waste energy, risk injury and go all out when it gains you NOTHING toward the ultimate goal of winning the gold. This is not CHEATING it is common sense coaching.

Click to expand...

I read your whole post three times and I am still at loss as to how it refers to the OP.

Let's go with the swimmers. Are ou saying that the swimmers that go first in the prelims have a better chance to win the final because they are more rested? I am curious to know, even though it has ZERO relevance to the badminton story.

Middleground said:

I read your whole post three times and I am still at loss as to how it refers to the OP.

Let's go with the swimmers. Are ou saying that the swimmers that go first in the prelims have a better chance to win the final because they are more rested? I am curious to know, even though it has ZERO relevance to the badminton story.

Click to expand...

The mission of ALL olympic competition is to win the gold, or AT LEAST to place in the top three. The matche schedules are set up IN ADVANCE based on placements in the preliminary, or "qualifying" rounds. The MORONIC scheduling "ladder" used for badminton placements made it WISE to lose certain matches to assure an easier path to the final rounds. I am saying that in the preliminary rounds you seek only to advance to the next round, if that means simply finishing in the top (or bottom) keeps you in then that is your ONLY goal. In a double elimination you can win from EITHER the winner's or the loser's bracket, so your coach makes a decision on the best path, which MAY be the losers bracket, as you will get AT LEAST a bronze playing fewer matches but winning them all after the initial loss.

In many events you need only be in the top three (of 8) to advance so why go "all out" if 3rd is as good as 1st? Conserving energy and not risking injury is a universal strategy. Marquise Goodwin (a long jumper and UT football player), for example, can jump 27 feet, yet "qualified" with a jump of only 21 feet in ONE attempt in the first round, while others may have had to make 3 tries to get "qualified", that sets him up better for the next round as he is more rested and he risked injury only once. It would be INSANE to set a record in the "qualifying" rounds if that taxed your strenght or caused an injury preventing you from winning (or even qualifying) druing the next round. Most olympic sports require many "wins" to get a chance at the medal round(s), so only a fool would go "all out" in each round.

ttwtt78640 said:

Conserving energy in early heats is NORMAL in many olympic sports and should NOT be viewed as cheating. If you look at REALITY, is it not VERY odd that TIRED swimmers/runners in later rounds score BETTER times than those same FRESH and RESTED swimmers/runners scored in the preliminary races? When presented with a schedule of opponenets one forms a strategy for use of their "best" efforts, this is done by ALL teams/individuals, expecially the USA basketball players, which lay back and conserve energy (and use less talented players) until they NEED to turn it up a bit. It is foolish to waste energy, risk injury and go all out when it gains you NOTHING toward the ultimate goal of winning the gold. This is not CHEATING it is common sense coaching.

Click to expand...

They weren't trying to coast through early heats, they were trying to lose in order to avoid tougher matches. That's cheating - the end result was correct just as the Olympic organiser throwing Taoufik Makhloufi out today when he stopped running 200m into his 800 metre heat. Mind you, he has a chance for re-instatement if they can get a Dr's certificate to the umpires to prove he was "unwell."