Tokyo Summer Olympic Games 2020 News

[Dunadan 1,103]

Sadly they did not change the scoring criteria and this 10-9 system is not objective enough so there's going to be a lot of alleged scandals...but showing the score at the end of each round is still better than not showing anything at all, and choosing to play differently depending on the current score is a part of every time based sport.

[bestmen 2,818]

Tokyo 2020 unveils 15,000-seat Olympic aquatics centre

Swimming, Diving, Artistic Swimming , paraswimming

Construction is 90 percent complete , will be ready the next february

 

 

 

[Dragon 1,844]

3 hours ago, Dunadan said:

Sadly they did not change the scoring criteria and this 10-9 system is not objective enough so there's going to be a lot of alleged scandals...but showing the score at the end of each round is still better than not showing anything at all, and choosing to play differently depending on the current score is a part of every time based sport.

So I've been thinking...

Here's my idea.

 

You go back to the pushing button system you had in 2012 and earlier but with some changes.

Person who lands most punches in a round gets 20 pounds.

If the other fighter lands 1-5 punches less in the round they 19 points.

6-10 punches less they get 18 points.

11-15 fewer punches they 17 and so on.

Fighter who gets knocked down loses a point.

 

And the same thing for all three rounds.

 

Would that be better?

 

Assuming that the judges are competent and honest of course...

[Olympian1010 7,973]

24 minutes ago, Dragon said:

So I've been thinking...

Here's my idea.

 

You go back to the pushing button system you had in 2012 and earlier but with some changes.

Person who lands most punches in a round gets 20 pounds.

If the other fighter lands 1-5 punches less in the round they 19 points.

6-10 punches less they get 18 points.

11-15 fewer punches they 17 and so on.

Fighter who gets knocked down loses a point.

 

And the same thing for all three rounds.

 

Would that be better?

 

Assuming that the judges are competent and honest of course...

I’m not sure boxing fans would like that. I don’t know much about Boxing, but I do know it’s more than just landing punches. The problem there’s no clear criteria for scoring, and trying to institute one now, would just further confuse the athletes and spectators. I really think the option at this point is go ahead with its inclusion in these, and then dismiss it from the Olympic sports program.

[Dunadan 1,103]

2 hours ago, Dragon said:

So I've been thinking...

Here's my idea.

 

You go back to the pushing button system you had in 2012 and earlier but with some changes.

Person who lands most punches in a round gets 20 pounds.

If the other fighter lands 1-5 punches less in the round they 19 points.

6-10 punches less they get 18 points.

11-15 fewer punches they 17 and so on.

Fighter who gets knocked down loses a point.

 

And the same thing for all three rounds.

 

Would that be better?

 

Assuming that the judges are competent and honest of course...

 

For me yes, it would be better, forcing judges to focus on counting punches, while now the other criteria like "controlling the bout" can be interpreted differently by each judge based on their personal preference (even if they are competent and not corrupted).

[dcro 10,210]

To be fair, boxing is much more than just punch counting. I don't like when sports try to become simple for the mainstream audience, as usually in the process they start to disregard their own stakeholders.

[Dragon 1,844]

 

[intoronto 5,638]

IOC changed Olympic parade order, with future host nations entering right before the current host, how stupid is that.

 

FFS

[JoshMartini007 2,536]

I was bored so I tried to see if I can come up with a better system for predicting medals. Places like GraceNote essentially take the top three contenders and give them gold, silver and bronze. That tends to cause situations where a nation with a 50% chance to win say 12 events would be predicted to win 12 medals, but in reality they would only win six. Usually this is masked by the overall medal count, but it becomes apparent if you look at the details for individual sports.

 

Currently my model is quite early in development, it doesn't take into account the maximum athletes per nation in a specific event or the chances of an athlete to fail (DNS/DSQ/DNF etc). It also only currently works for events where you can obtain a score/time/measurement (placing/head to head events will have to wait).

 

Here's a sample of the men's 100m (top 5) that I was using as my test data.

 

Men's 100m

Gold

- 76.4%

- 17.8%

- 1.9%

- 1.5%

- 0.9%

 

Silver

- 60.6%

- 17.8%

- 5.8%

- 4.4%

- 4.2%

 

Bronze

- 46.0%

- 14.7%

- 9.9%

- 7.7%

- 6.3%

 

 

As mentioned above, the United States is currently a bit inflated due to more than three athletes contributing to its chances (removing them manually and redistributing it would give them 73.3%, 53.5% and 38.6% chances respectively).

[dcro 10,210]

Torch relay convoy.