Olympics 2021

[tobydawq]

Am I the only one who thinks it is profoundly problematic that it's up to the two jumpers to decide whether they want do have a gold medal each or do a jump off?

I have thought about tie breakers for high jump competitions quite a lot today and can't really come up with a perfect system but having a choice seems absurd. Also, it's quite moronic how so many media have lauded Bashim and Tamberi for their sportsmanship on the matter. Who would gamble a gold medal in that situation???

 

[tobydawq]

There's a few others that used to be faster, but then they all got banned for Clinic stuff, so I guess it still makes sense.

Not much faster, I don't think. But with the super shoes, they should actually approach Bolt's times (maybe not the one from Berlin) and they certainly have not done so. It also didn't really help that the world number 1 didn't even make it to the finals.

And did anybody see the world number 1 on the 400 meter, Randolph Ross, who got eliminated in the opening round? I really didn't understand what he was doing because he seemed to have passed the number three in his heat but then in the last ten metres he just put on the brakes and got passed again, and then his time was not fast enough to advance as a lucky loser. It seemed utterly bizarre but nobody seems to have noticed anything weird.

 

[sir fly]

Am I the only one who thinks it is profoundly problematic that it's up to the two jumpers to decide whether they want do have a gold medal each or do a jump off?

I have thought about tie breakers for high jump competitions quite a lot today and can't really come up with a perfect system but having a choice seems absurd. Also, it's quite moronic how so many media have lauded Bashim and Tamberi for their sportsmanship on the matter. Who would gamble a gold medal in that situation???

Give them silver if decide to share.

 

[RedheadDane]

Am I the only one who thinks it is profoundly problematic that it's up to the two jumpers to decide whether they want do have a gold medal each or do a jump off?

I have thought about tie breakers for high jump competitions quite a lot today and can't really come up with a perfect system but having a choice seems absurd. Also, it's quite moronic how so many media have lauded Bashim and Tamberi for their sportsmanship on the matter. Who would gamble a gold medal in that situation???

I think it's sweet.
How were they gambling it? They both got gold!
Otoh, if the rules had been clear, and they'd had to go through a jump-off, then the one doing best in that would've won gold.

I suppose the real issue would have been if they hadn't been able to agree.

 

[tobydawq]

I think it's sweet.
How were they gambling it? They both got gold!
Otoh, if the rules had been clear, and they'd had to go through a jump-off, then the one doing best in that would've won gold.

I suppose the real issue would have been if they hadn't been able to agree.

That's what I mean. Why would they gamble their gold medal? They both had it if they could agree to that (so of course they agreed). Otherwise they would risk losing it.

If they hadn't been able to agree, they would have had a jump-off. Those are the rules, as I understood them.

 

[tobydawq]

Give them silver if decide to share.

Yeah, but then it would turn into a reality program, and luckily that's not (yet) what the Olympics are about.

And we have to have a winner.

I mean, it's not unheard of to share a gold medal in swimming, if they can't split two swimmers on hundreths but it just seems a bit more likely to happen in high jump or pole vault (even if I have never seen it happen before, admittedly).

 

[sir fly]

Yeah, but then it would turn into a reality program, and luckily that's not (yet) what the Olympics are about.

And we have to have a winner.

I mean, it's not unheard of to share a gold medal in swimming, if they can't split two swimmers on hundreths but it just seems a bit more likely to happen in high jump or pole vault (even if I have never seen it happen before, admittedly).

No more reality than we've already seen.
It would practically push them to fight out the gold.
The premise of the rule is wrong. No one will risk gold.

 

[RedheadDane]

If they hadn't been able to agree, they would have had a jump-off. Those are the rules, as I understood them.

In that case, I guess they'd have had to agree; either to share the gold, or to do a jump-off. Otherwise, the person wanting to do the jump-off would win the argument by default.

 

[tobydawq]

No more reality than we've already seen.
It would practically push them to fight out the gold.
The premise of the rule is wrong. No one will risk gold.

We agree, I just don't think they should have a choice (and your silver medals for both idea basically ensures that it's a non-choice, hopefully).

 

[tobydawq]

In that case, I guess they'd have had to agree; either to share the gold, or to do a jump-off. Otherwise, the person wanting to do the jump-off would win the argument by default.

Yeah, but it's not an argument in that sense of the word. The commentators made it sound like "if they can agree upon it, they can both get the gold". So if they can't then there will be a jump-off. So yes, if you are determined to do the jump-off, you can decide that that is what is going to happen no matter what the other jumper thinks. But it will never happen.

Also, what would happen if they couldn't agree in your scenario? Olympics to be cancelled?

 

[djpbaltimore]

Not much faster, I don't think. But with the super shoes, they should actually approach Bolt's times (maybe not the one from Berlin) and they certainly have not done so. It also didn't really help that the world number 1 didn't even make it to the finals.

And did anybody see the world number 1 on the 400 meter, Randolph Ross, who got eliminated in the opening round? I really didn't understand what he was doing because he seemed to have passed the number three in his heat but then in the last ten metres he just put on the brakes and got passed again, and then his time was not fast enough to advance as a lucky loser. It seemed utterly bizarre but nobody seems to have noticed anything weird.

Ross has been off the boil for a while. He was a distant third at trials. At 20 years old and competing throughout the collegiate season, I think he couldn't hold his peak. He should've made the semis, but doubtful he was going to make the final.

The 100m times are almost exactly equivalent to the times for Rio. All the finalists running 10.0 or faster in the semis is pretty fast. In 2016, all the finalists ran under 10.01.

 

[tobydawq]

Ross has been off the boil for a while. He was a distant third at trials. At 20 years old and competing throughout the collegiate season, I think he couldn't hold his peak. He should've made the semis, but doubtful he was going to make the final.

The 100m times are almost exactly equivalent to the times for Rio. All the finalists running 10.0 or faster in the semis is pretty fast. In 2016, all the finalists ran under 10.01.

It was more the way he (Ross) lost on purpose that was strange to me.

 

[Red Rick]

Am I the only one who thinks it is profoundly problematic that it's up to the two jumpers to decide whether they want do have a gold medal each or do a jump off?

I have thought about tie breakers for high jump competitions quite a lot today and can't really come up with a perfect system but having a choice seems absurd. Also, it's quite moronic how so many media have lauded Bashim and Tamberi for their sportsmanship on the matter. Who would gamble a gold medal in that situation???

Media goes "hurr durrr wholesome moment" is why.

 

[jmdirt]

I mean 'opportunities to cheat' in the sense that instead of using a clear and objective measure (blue 'hooks' on the track) of where the takeover zone is it becomes a case of 'he-said-she-said' guesswork/one side word against the other side's over who was told what and when. And that's where for me there are opportunities to possibly break/abuse the rules.

I just don't see it that way. If an official (there are about 20 of them scurrying around the start/exchange zone) had told her that she wasn't in the zone, and she didn't move back that is on her, and she should be DQed. The marks (hooks) are clear, but clearly there was confusion in both heats so something was amiss.

I don't like LS's stance that "we shouldn't have to tell them something they should know" either. I want to see the best race the best so I want the officials making sure that the athletes know that they are making a mistake (on purpose or by mistake).

All of this is somewhat irrelevant if the official actually told her to line up there.

 

[djpbaltimore]

It was more the way he (Ross) lost on purpose that was strange to me.

Sherika Jackson just did that in the 200m. Bronze medalist in the 100m eliminated in the heats because she cruised to the line. Oops.

One thing not mentioned about the 400m is the Polish runner who ran the opening leg in the relay finished last in the race with an apparent injury. Besides the Dq saga, scheduling the race a day before the open 400m was pretty stupid. That is why none of the top runners ran it.

 

[tobydawq]

Media goes "hurr durrr wholesome moment" is why.

That is why the rule is there in the first place? No way! You honestly believe that?

 

[Red Rick]

That is why the rule is there in the first place? No way! You honestly believe that?

I meant just the part where media were all hyping it. I agree the rule is strange as hell amd frankly should not be there. Just split the medal by default if you have no suffivient tiebreaker.

 

[RedheadDane]

Yeah, but it's not an argument in that sense of the word. The commentators made it sound like "if they can agree upon it, they can both get the gold". So if they can't then there will be a jump-off. So yes, if you are determined to do the jump-off, you can decide that that is what is going to happen no matter what the other jumper thinks. But it will never happen.

It's unlikely, true. But I suppose if two jumpers really didn't like each other, they might prefer losing gold rather than having to share it with the other. Of course, if one suggests sharing, and the other insists on a jump-off, then the one insisting on the jump-off risks not only the gold, but also coming across as a bit of an arrogant ***.

Otoh, if they'd agreed to do a jump-off, and entered it with an agreement of "let the best jumper win", then I think that would've been sportsmanship too.

Just split the medal by default if you have no suffivient tiebreaker.

Or have the default rule be that they'd have to do a jump-off...
Or - bit silly - literally split the medal(s); take one gold medal and one silver medal, cut them in half, and give them both a half each.

 

[tobydawq]

Or - bit silly - literally split the medal(s); take one gold medal and one silver medal, cut them in half, and give them both a half each.

Lol

 

[RedheadDane]

Lol

Jumper 1: We'll split the medal!
Official: Okay. *sends someone off to do... something... * right, medal ceremony will be delayed a little.
Jumper 2: Wait... why?
Official: You'll see.

Medal Ceremony time!

Bronze winner: *Gets medal. *
Official: Please both step only the second-place spot.
Jumpers: *Confused looks. Does as requested. *
Podium-person: *Gives them their half silver medals. *
Jumpers: *Confused looks intensifies. *
Official: Now, please both step onto the top-step.
Jumpers: *Confused, does as requested. *
Podium-person: *Gives them their half gold medals. *
Jumpers: *Peak confusion. *
Jumper 2: Errr... what the ***?
Jumper 1: Not exactly what I meant but... cool.

 

[tobydawq]

Meh.

Anyways, I may tend to be a little exasperated with your fixation on cloning when people accidentally write a name twice but for your own amusement you should check out the Spanish and Portuguese female kayak sprinters who both qualified for the semifinals during the night.

Also, where were you yesterday? I didn't see you in the shot put final (unless you were stripped from your citizenship)

 

[RedheadDane]

Also, where were you yesterday? I didn't see you in the shot put final (unless you were stripped from your citizenship)

If you were looking for someone named "RedheadDane", I'm sorry to disappoint you, it's not my real name.

but for your own amusement you should check out the Spanish and Portuguese female kayak sprinters who both qualified for the semifinal's during the night.

Check it, where?

 

[gunara]

Or - bit silly - literally split the medal(s); take one gold medal and one silver medal, cut them in half, and give them both a half each.

It's not silly, I think in some sports if you're tied for a position - not usually for 1st though, there should be clearer rule - you'll get something like that in prize and point. Three players tied for 2nd, then they'll have (2+3+4)/3

 

[tobydawq]

If course it's silly, they're not going to remelt the medals...

 

[tobydawq]

If you were looking for someone named "RedheadDane", I'm sorry to disappoint you, it's not my real name.




Check it, where?

Well, I didn't see any Danes at all.

This is the start list for the semifinal:

Tokyo 2020 Men's Kayak Single 200m Results - Olympic canoe-sprint

Find out who took home gold, silver and bronze in 2020. Official results of the canoe-sprint Men's Kayak Single 200m event at the Tokyo Summer Olympics.

olympics.com