website statistics
Jump to content

Ogreman

Totallympics Fanatic
  • Posts

    149
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Reputation Activity

  1. Thanks
    Ogreman reacted to dodge in Team Ireland - Paris 2024 Qualification Tracker   
    Just on Tara Hanlon, she’s no longer part of the national squad, so you can rule her out of future combinations 
  2. Like
    Ogreman reacted to Rafa Maciel in Track Cycling UCI Nations Cup 2024   
    Provisional entries are out for the final Nations Cup event in Milton (12-Apr - 14-Apr)
     
    As always, take the UCI entry list with a pinch of salt as they have been wrong in the past in terms of the actual line-ups used...
     
    Men's Team Pursuit:
    No  team entered and also no  or   will be favourites for the event as they send one of their strongest teams - Bigham / Tanfield / Vernon / Charlton  not going with their A-Team favouring Lamon / Boscaro / Giaimi / Moro although Consonni and Viviani are in the squad for Madison so would be available for TP.  
    Men's Team Sprint:
    No  so will be a relatively straightforward win for     and  all fighting for the last quota spot and competing with pretty strong squads -  and  have the same squad from 2023 World Champs whilst  have the European bronze medalist team. Realistically the battle will come down to  v  with Poland needing to finish at least 1 place higher than Canada to take the final quota.   
    Women's Team Sprint:
    No  and a second string  squad with no Hinze or Friedrich. It's a case of now or never for  - they need to take advantage of the absence of the big 2 and get themselves into the medal rides and hope that  finish mid-table.  
    Women's Team Pursuit:
    No  or   will likely be favourites as they are sending their top team - Archibald / Knight / Morris / Barker with Evans available as sub. Think they may want to put a marker down given they've seen New Zealand take the last two NC events  
     
    Other Thoughts:
     Ellesse Andrews is back after her crash in Adelaide. With no  and the top  missing, she'll likely start as favourite in the Keirin, but it won't tell us as much as we would have liked about her medal prospects.  Martha Bayona is back in both the Sprint and the Keirin after less than stellar results in Adelaide.   Katie Archibald is down for both the Madison (with Neah Evans) and the Omnium. Women's Omnium will be missing  Ally Wollaston and  Lotte Kopecky but the gold and silver medalist from Glasgow are in the field alongside the silver medalist from Tokyo so it is still pretty stacked.  
  3. Sad
    Ogreman got a reaction from mattiekav119 in Team Ireland - Paris 2024 Qualification Tracker   
    https://www.irishnews.com/sport/amy-broadhurst-everything-ive-put-in-over-the-last-22-years-it-just-feels-like-its-been-blown-away-NSBELKXOX5GJ7KB4X2EBZMXPVE/
     
    I don't understand this decision but best of the luck to Grainne Walsh I guess. 
     
    Heartbreaking end to her amateur career for Amy Broadhurst. One of our best ever female boxers and yet we never managed to get her to an Olympics. I'd fully expect her to go on to win a world title as a pro but its not the same as an Olympic medal.
     
    On a more optimistic note, looks like Wexford boxing's media propaganda campaign over Dean Walsh has failed miserably.
  4. Like
    Ogreman reacted to nenad in Men's Basketball Qualification to Summer Olympic Games Paris 2024   
    But, also, to be clear, if everyone's healthy and everyone agrees to play I'll take Serbia over Canada and France for silver any day of the week. Jokić is just so good and other players know how to play as a team more than Canada's and France's.. 
  5. Like
    Ogreman got a reaction from orangeman in Men's Basketball Qualification to Summer Olympic Games Paris 2024   
    Look I'm definitely more of an NBA fan than an international basketball fan because you know Ireland and our recent historic triumph at the european championships for small countries doesn't really do it for me but this thread is way too low on Canada. They have a very complete roster top to bottom and sure star power matters less than it does in the NBA but Shai Gilgeous Alexander and Jamal Murray are two of the most reliable bucket getters in the world. Canada has a litany of elite defensive wings and as such possibly has the highest defensive upside of anyone here.
     
    Maybe it doesn't work out for them but talking about them like they are a team who are unlikely to/ should be satisfied with making the quarter finals is bonkers. Look I love the idea of Jokic punking the Americans or the French beating them on home soil, but for me the team that is best matched to push a possibly ageing US team is Canada. (Admittedly that is not to say that I think they would definitely beat France or Serbia just that they match up better with the Americans.)
  6. Like
    Ogreman got a reaction from Josh in Men's Basketball Qualification to Summer Olympic Games Paris 2024   
    Look I'm definitely more of an NBA fan than an international basketball fan because you know Ireland and our recent historic triumph at the european championships for small countries doesn't really do it for me but this thread is way too low on Canada. They have a very complete roster top to bottom and sure star power matters less than it does in the NBA but Shai Gilgeous Alexander and Jamal Murray are two of the most reliable bucket getters in the world. Canada has a litany of elite defensive wings and as such possibly has the highest defensive upside of anyone here.
     
    Maybe it doesn't work out for them but talking about them like they are a team who are unlikely to/ should be satisfied with making the quarter finals is bonkers. Look I love the idea of Jokic punking the Americans or the French beating them on home soil, but for me the team that is best matched to push a possibly ageing US team is Canada. (Admittedly that is not to say that I think they would definitely beat France or Serbia just that they match up better with the Americans.)
  7. Like
    Ogreman reacted to Pasolini in Rowing WR American Olympic Qualification Regatta 2024   
    If I'm not mistaken we finished like this:

     
    W1x
    ✅🇧🇷 Beatriz CUNHA TAVARES CARDOSO
    ✅🇲🇽Kenia LECHUGA
    ❓🇦🇷Maria Sol AMAYA
    ✅🇵🇾Alejandra ALONSO
    ✅🇵🇪Adriana Maria SANGUINETI VELASCO
    ❗🇨🇺Yariulvis COBAS GARCIA
     
    M1x
    ✅🇧🇷Lucas VERTHEIN FERREIRA
    ✅🇺🇾Bruno CETRARO BERRIOLO
    ✅🇵🇾Javier INSFRAN
    ✅🇧🇲Dara ALIZADEH
    ✅🇨🇺Reidy ARDONA BLANCO
     
    W2x
    ❓🇦🇷Sonia BALUZZO CHIARUZZO / Evelyn Maricel SILVESTRO
    ✅🇵🇪Alessia PALACIOS / Valeria PALACIOS
    ...
    ❌🇵🇾Adriana SANABRIA / Rocio Bordon
    ❗🇬🇹Lesli GONZALEZ / Yulisa LOPEZ
     
    M2x
    ✅🇨🇱Cesar ABAROA, Cesar / Eber SANHUEZA
    ❓🇦🇷Alejandro Matias COLOMINO / Pedro Jose Kirk DICKSON
    ...
    ❗🇻🇪Andre MORA / Luis OLLARVES MOTA
     
    2 boats:
    1 boat:  
     
    14th quota would go to one of  depending on the boats Argentina chooses.
    I think it would go Cuba!
  8. Like
    Ogreman got a reaction from Josh in Rowing WR American Olympic Qualification Regatta 2024   
    For what its worth, I 'd be shocked if this scenario played out and Brazil didn't choose Lucas Verthein Ferreira over their lightweight double. Verthein Ferreira was 12th in Tokyo and 14th at last years world championships and they haven't selected a lightweight double at all this Olympic cycle other than panam games where they finished 4th as far as I am aware. He will almost certainly win here and this should just be a quirk of using heat times so this shouldn't end up mattering but it does have implications for the likes of  and  in the M1x and  in the LM2x.
     
    Also what happened to 's LM2x. Felipe Kluver Ferreira and Mauricio Lopez Berocay came 15th at worlds last year. Kluver Ferreira made 3 world cup finals in the LM1x and was under 23 world champion in that boat in 2022. With a bit of luck they made the Olympic final in Tokyo with Kluver Ferreira and Bruno Cetraro Berriolo who is now in the M1x. How are they finishing last in their heat here? Is their new man Franco Liuzzi that bad?
  9. Like
    Ogreman reacted to JoshMartini007 in Rowing WR American Olympic Qualification Regatta 2024   
    After the heats here's how the quota simulation is looking. Comparing between heats isn't a great idea plus some athletes might be resting, but it's fun to see where things stand.
     
    M1x -  
    LM2x -  
    W1x -  
    LW2x -  
     
     
    Mexico and Chile could have qualified in the men's single sculls, but the limit prevented them. As Brazil is currently second in both the M1x and LM2x I assume they want more athletes, but that may not be the case. If they go for the M1x the LM2x quota would go to Venezuela (leapfrogging Chile due to the limit).
     
    Still lots of racing to go.
  10. Like
    Ogreman reacted to Benolympique in Rowing WR American Olympic Qualification Regatta 2024   
    Results Day  :
     
    https://worldrowing.com/event/2024-world-rowing-americas-olympic-and-paralympic-qualification-regatta/
  11. Sad
    Ogreman reacted to dodge in Boxing IOC Olympic Qualifier 1 2024   
    Remember all those posts by me defending judging and saying 99% of complaints about robberies were just moaning
     
    DISREGARD ALL OF THAT
     
    Poor Grainne Walsh
  12. Like
    Ogreman reacted to MHSN in Boxing IOC Olympic Qualifier 1 2024   
    The Mexican guy pinned Paalam to the ring by some wrestling techniques. he finished that bout on pain. I'm not surprised he didn't continue
     
    but that means that piece of crap TKM boxer (who beat our guy completely unfairly) is going to the QF without doing anything.
  13. Like
    Ogreman reacted to Josh in Boxing IOC Olympic Qualifier 1 2024   
    With one days left, here’s what the Olympic quota bracket is looking like.
     
    Men’s 51kg (4 OQPs)
     Yuberjen Martinez v.  Alejandro Claro
     Nijat Huseynov v.  Roscoe Hill
     Kim In-Kyu v.  Juanma Lopez De Jesus
     Kiaran MacDonald v.  Saken Bibossinov 
     
    Men’s 57kg (4 OQPs)
     Makhmud Sabyrkhan v.  Asror Vokhidov
     Lyu Ping v.  Yilmar Gonzalez 
     Sukur Owezow v.  Jude Gallagher
     Luiz Oliveira v.  Owain Harris-Allan
     
    Men’s 63.5kg (4 OQPs)
     Saparmyrat Odayew v.  Jesus Cova
     Alexandru Paraschiv v.  Obada Al-Kasbeh 
     Ruslan Abdullaev v.  Aleksej Sendrik
     Shion Nishiyama v.  Bakhodur Usmonov
     
    Men’s 71kg (4 OQPs)
     Wanderson De Oliveira v.  Rami Mofid Kiwan
     Asadkhuja Muydinkhujaev v.  Zeyad Ishaish
     Aslanbek Shymbergenov v.  Sarkhan Aliyev
     Omari Jones v.  Nishant Dev
     
    Men’s 80kg (4 OQPs)
     Kelyn Cassidy v.  Nurbek Oralbay
     Kim Jin-Jea v.  Kaan Aykutsun 
     Juan Ortiz v.  Turabek Khabibullaev 
     Pylyp Akilov v.  Gradus Kraus
     
    Men’s 92kg (4 OQPs)
     Lazizbek Mullojonov v.  Giorgi Kushitashvili
     Enmanuel Reyes v.  Sadam Magomedov
     Jamar Talley v.  Aibek Oralbay
     Mateusz Bereznicki v.  Patrick Brown
     
    Men’s +92kg (4 OQPs)
     Danis Latypov v.  Diego Lenzi
     Dusan Veletic v.  Nelvie Tiafack
     Omar Shiha v.  Danabieke Bayikewuzi
     Alexis Barriere v.  Djamili Aboudoi Moindze
     
    Women’s 50kg (4 OQPs)
     Alua Balkibekova v.  Maxi Klotzer
     Sabina Bobokulova v.  Rinka Kinoshita
     Zlatislava Chukanova v.  Aira Villegas
     Natalia Kuczewska v.  Ingrit Valencia
     
    Women’s 54kg (4 OQPs)
     Scarlett Delgado v.  Sara Cirkovic
     Jutamas Jitpong v.  Shera Mae Patricio
     Sirine Charaabi v.  Im Ae-Ji
     Islem Ferchichi v.  Vo Thi Kim Anh
     
    Women’s 57kg (2 OQPs)
     Nesthy Petecio v.  Esra Yildiz
     Julia Szeremeta v.  Alyssa Mendoza
     
    Women’s 60kg (3 OQPs)
     Chelsea Heijnen and  Donjeta Sadiku have already booked their tickets to Paris. Winner of the third place bout between  Miroslava Jedinakova and  Alessia Mesiano will join them. 
     
    Women’s 66kg (4 OQPs)
     Navbakhor Khamidova v.  Maria Moronta
     Anastasiia Chernokolenko v.  Chen Nien-Chin
     Angela Carini v.  Ivanusa Moreira
     Grainne Walsh v.  Aneta Rygielska
     
    Women’s 75kg (4 OQPs)
    Cindy Ngamba v.  Valentina Khalzova
     Aziza Zokirova v.  Chantelle Reid
     Sunniva Hofstad v.  Love Holgersson
     Patricia Mbata v.  Elzbieta Wojcik
     
    Total By Country
    7: 
    5: 
    4: 
    3: 
    2: 
    1: 
  14. Like
    Ogreman reacted to Josh in Boxing IOC Olympic Qualifier 1 2024   
    With two days left, here’s what the Olympic quota bracket is looking like. Stupid emoji limit isn’t letting me add any more, this will be updated within 15 minutes. 
     
    Men’s 51kg (4 OQPs)
     Yuberjen Martinez v.  Tomoya Tsuboi
     Alejandro Claro v.  Luis Delgado
     Rudolf Garboyan v.  Nijat Huseynov
     Huthaifa Eshish v.  Roscoe Hill
     Theophilus Allotey v.  Kim In-Kyu
     Ramon Quiroga v.  Juanma Lopez De Jesus
     Rogen Ladon v.  Kiaran MacDonald
     Saken Bibossinov v.  Azar Makhmetov
     
    Men’s 57kg (4 OQPs)
     Makhmud Sabyrkhan v.  Caleb Tirado
     Asror Vokhidov v.  Umid Rustamov
     Lyu Ping v.  Pedro Manuel Gomes
     Yilmar Gonzalez v.  Tryagain Ndevelo
     Carlo Paalam v.  Sukur Owezow
     Soulaimane Samghouli v.  Jude Gallagher
     Luiz Oliveira v.  Artyush Gomtsyan
     Owain Harris-Allan v.  Lucas Fernandez
     
    Men’s 63.5kg (4 OQPs)
     Saparmyrat Odayew v.  Jesus Cova
     Alexandru Paraschiv v.  Obada Al-Kasbeh 
     Ruslan Abdullaev v.  Aleksej Sendrik
     Shion Nishiyama v.  Bakhodur Usmonov
     
    Men’s 71kg (4 OQPs)
     Milos Bartl v.  Wanderson De Oliveira
     Rami Mofid Kiwan v.  Syrgak Abdyzhapar Uulu
     Asadkhuja Muydinkhujaev v.  Alexander Rangel
    Zeyad Ishaish v.  Jorge Cuellar
     Bayramdurdy Nurmuhammedow v.  Aslanbek Shymbergenov
     Gurgen Madoyan v.  Sarkhan Aliyev
     Omari Jones v.  Moslem Maghsoudi
     Nishant Dev v.  Christos Karaitis
     
    Men’s 80kg (4 OQPs)
     Kelyn Cassidy v.  Rafayel Hovhannisyan
     Nurbek Oralbay v.  Aliaksei Alfiorau
     Andrej Csemez v.  Kim Jin-Jea
     Kaan Aykutsun v.  Omurbek Bekzhigit Uulu
     Juan Ortiz v.  Taj Kagho
     Turabek Khabibullaev v.  Yojerlin Cesar
     Mindaugas Gedminas v.  Pylyp Akilov
     Meysam Gheshlaghi v.  Gradus Kraus
     
    Men’s 92kg (4 OQPs)
     Lazizbek Mullojonov v.  Giorgi Kushitashvili
     Enmanuel Reyes v.  Sadam Magomedov
     Jamar Talley v.  Aibek Oralbay
     Mateusz Bereznicki v.  Patrick Brown
     
    Men’s +92kg (4 OQPs)
     Danis Latypov v.  Diego Lenzi
     Dusan Veletic v.  Nelvie Tiafack
     Omar Shiha v.  Danabieke Bayikewuzi
     Alexis Barriere v.  Djamili Aboudoi Moindze
     
    Women’s 50kg (4 OQPs)
     Alua Balkibekova v.  Jung Joo-Hyung
     Maxi Klotzer v.  Guo Yi-Xuan
     Daina Moorehouse v.  Sabina Bobokulova
     Aldana Lopez v.  Rinka Kinoshita
     Hanan Nassar v.  Zlatislava Chukanova
     Aira Villegas v.  Sofie Rosshaug
     Ruhafzo Haqnazarova v.  Natalia Kuczewska
     Susan Aguas v.  Ingrit Valencia
     
    Women’s 54kg (4 OQPs)
     Scarlett Delgado v.  Sara Cirkovic
     Jutamas Jitpong v.  Shera Mae Patricio
     Sirine Charaabi v.  Im Ae-Ji
     Islem Ferchichi v.  Vo Thi Kim Anh
     
    Women’s 57kg (2 OQPs)
     Nesthy Petecio v.  Maud Van Der Toorn
     Esra Yildiz v.  Elise Glynn
     Julia Szeremeta v.  Sitora Turdibekova
     Alyssa Mendoza v.  Jin Hye-Jeong
     
    Women’s 60kg (3 OQPs)
     Chelsea Heijnen and  Donjeta Sadiku have already booked their tickets to Paris. Winner of the third place bout between  Miroslava Jedinakova and  Alessia Mesiano will join them. 
     
    Women’s 66kg (4 OQPs)
     Navbakhor Khamidova v.  Maria Moronta
     Anastasiia Chernokolenko v.  Chen Nien-Chin
     Angela Carini v.  Ivanusa Moreira
     Grainne Walsh v.  Aneta Rygielska
     
    Women’s 75kg (4 OQPs)
    Cindy Ngamba v.  Valentina Khalzova
     Aziza Zokirova v.  Chantelle Reid
     Sunniva Hofstad v.  Love Holgersson
     Patricia Mbata v.  Elzbieta Wojcik
     
    Total By Country
    8: 
    7: 
    5: 
    4: 
    3: 
    2:
    1: 
  15. Like
    Ogreman got a reaction from hckošice in Boxing IOC Olympic Qualifier 1 2024   
    Yeah ok, I rewatched this fight. Still think Gonzalez probably deserved to win but it was very close and wasn't clearly wrong. 
     
    To be clear my macro take on the judging throughout qualifying is that (other than host country bias which has existed at every boxing tournament ever) the judging has been remarkably unbiased. It just hasn't been very good. 
    On the commentary thing I don't think yer man is that good a judge of boxing fights. I have watched many a fight where it feels he seems to be commentating on an entirely different fight to what I'm watching. To be fair I have thought Nicola Adams has been fairly insightful, the other three of them I'm not so sure about.
     
    Lastly my own judging abilities aren't very good, I mentioned the Csemez Gonzalez fight because I had been surprised by the decision and then I had also seen others elsewhere be surprised by the decision. It is completely fair to disregard my opinion on judging decisions in specific fights.
     
  16. Like
  17. Like
    Ogreman got a reaction from Fly_like_a_don in Boxing IOC Olympic Qualifier 1 2024   
    I mostly agree that the current scoring system doesn't work effectively. For me I would just change the default score for a round to 10-8 and then only close rounds be scored 10-9 and one sided rounds 10-7 rather than the current system where unless you batter the shit out of someone for three minutes straight, the score will be 10-9. This would obviously deviate from pro boxing and make the sytem more complex and being simple to understand is the primary logic behind the current scoring system but I think it would make fights more interesting and should make judging decisions more accurate
     
    Yes, the judges here are just bad, but there were only probably a couple of decisions they actually got wrong today though (Csemez  3-2 Gonzalez  and Ovezov  3-2 Shahbakhsh  are the two that spring to mind but I would need to watch them again to be sure). Obviously I only saw half of a lot of fights and missed some entirely but this was the sense I got. I think the IOC is kind of using the qualifying tournaments to figure out who the bad judges are so hopefully by the Olympics the judging will be closer to competent but obviously using the qualifying tournaments to do this is far from ideal.
     
     
    Anyway this is what I actually wanted to address because the comentators made this mistake too. This statement is sort of true but also not really true at all. In actuality one warning (point deduction) can almost never change the result of a fight. Two and ye you have to win all three rounds for at least 3 judges to win the fight which is obviously pretty devastating but one deduction doesn't really do anything because of how ties are scored. 
     
    So disregarding 10-8s typically the possible scores are 30-27, 29-28, 28-29 and 27-30. If a judge gives all three rounds to the same boxer points deductions can never effect anything (3rd points deduction is a disqualification) so the score changes to 30-26 or 27-29 (30-25 and 27-28 with 2 warnings) not effecting the result at all. If a boxer loses 28-29 and has a points deduction then it just changes to 27-29 and again no impact on the outcome of the fight. The confusing one is when a boxer wins two rounds and has a points deduction in which the score does indeed change to 28-28 but whats crucial here is the rules regarding tied scorecards.
     
    I don't think this is widely understood very well but the rule regarding tied scores is if the judges who have it tied can effect the outcome, then they go back to those judges and they pick a winner. Basically if the tied scores matter the relevant judges pick a winner and as such you can never end a fight with the score being 2-0, 2-1 or 1-0. 
     
    I'll use an actual example to explain this. So lets look at one of today's 57kg fights Carlo Paalam  vs Andrey Bonilla . This fight ended 3-1 to Paalam after Bonilla got a point deduction for what was basically a body slam. (Paalam seemed to hurt his shoulder so hopefully he is ok) (Also its a while since I have seen a boxer as dirty as Bonilla. Would not want to have to box him.) So the judges scores ended up being 29-27 (29-28), 29-27 (29-28), 27-29 (27-30), 28-28 (28-29), 29-27 (29-28) (score with no deduction in brackets) where judges 1,2 and 5 had Paalam winning two rounds and losing one. Judge 3 having Bonilla winning all three and judge 4 having Bonilla winning 2 and losing one round. With the points deduction obviously meaning that judge 4's score was tied. All the other judges results were unaffected by the deduction. Because judge 4's score couldn't change the outcome of the fight his scorecard was simply left as a tie. If he was asked he almost certainly would have given Bonilla the fight given that he gave him 2 rounds and Paalam only one but that would still only make the score 3-2 so it is just left as a tie and the fight's score is 3-1.
     
    If for example one more judge went in favour of Bonilla the scores in the Paalam Bonilla fight would therfore be 29-27, 29-27, 27-29, 28-28, 28-28. This fight would not end 2-1 in favour of Paalam. The two tied scores, in this hypothethical case judge 4 and 5, could cumalatively change the winner of the fight so they go back to judge 4 and 5 and they both pick a winner. Again, crucially for a fight to be 28-28 the boxer who received a points deduction has to have won two rounds for that judge and therefore that judge logically would almost always pick that boxer to win. In this scenario the score with a points deduction would be 2-3 in favour of Bonilla assuming judge 4 and 5 are logical and if the points deduction never happened the score would also be 2-3 in favour of Bonilla.
     
    To emphasize this any fight where with tied scores the fight initially is scored 2-0, 2-1 or 1-0 the tied judges choose a victor and because the only way to have a points deduction and a tied score (not including 10-8 scenarios) is where the boxer who received a deduction won 2 rounds for the tied judge/ judges. Logically one point deduction should never change the outcome of a fight. 
     
    Unfortunately for my argument and the reason I had to caveat everything above with almosts is there are occasionally counter examples and one actually happened today. In the Susan Aguas  vs Marjona Savrieva  fight at W50kg, Savrieva picked up a points deduction in the third round and the scores ended up being 30-26, 29-27, 28-28, 28-28 and 28-28 as a result. As explained above Aguas doesn't win the fight 2-0, the three tied judges could and should have changed the final outcome so judge 3,4 and 5 choose their winner. Judge 3 and 5 of course chose Savrieva having both given her 2 rounds. Whats strange though is on this occasion judge 4 despite giving Savrieva the first 2 rounds and Aguas only the third decided that Aguas won the fight which as I say doesn't really make much logical sense. If judge 4 believed Aguas was that dominant in the third round then that round should have been scored 10-8 by said judge. I think I have only ever seen this scenario of illogical tied decisions happen once or twice.
     
    Apologies for probably overexplaining this a bit but it is quite counterintuitive and the morale of the story is barring stupidity or a second non standard score ( second points deduction/ 10-8 round) one solitary warning despite seemingly changing the scores a lot should never change the ultimate outcome of a fight.
     
    Just finally there is funny quirk of this system where if you win a fight for 3 judges and 2 have it tied (be it a points deduction or a 10-8 round) you would win a split decision 3-0. However if you win a fight for just 1/2 judges and the other 3/4 have it tied. The tied judges are then evaluated again and if they all give you the fight you would then win a unanimous decision 5-0.
    Obviously this doesn't effect the result or anything but I just think its funny that potentially winning one less round for 1/2 judges in rare cases can actually turn a split decision win into a unanimous win.
    This happened in the Maud Van der Toorn  vs Jennifer Fernadez  fight where after Van der Toorn had a points deduction 1 judge had her winning (having given her all three rounds) and the other 4 judges had it tied but having given her 2 rounds gave her the fight. If she had convinced two more judges to give her all 3 rounds (Not that she deserved 3 rounds, Fernandez deservedly won round 2) she would have the fight 3-0 and it would have been a split decision and not a unanimous one.
  18. Like
    Ogreman got a reaction from Josh in Boxing IOC Olympic Qualifier 1 2024   
    I mostly agree that the current scoring system doesn't work effectively. For me I would just change the default score for a round to 10-8 and then only close rounds be scored 10-9 and one sided rounds 10-7 rather than the current system where unless you batter the shit out of someone for three minutes straight, the score will be 10-9. This would obviously deviate from pro boxing and make the sytem more complex and being simple to understand is the primary logic behind the current scoring system but I think it would make fights more interesting and should make judging decisions more accurate
     
    Yes, the judges here are just bad, but there were only probably a couple of decisions they actually got wrong today though (Csemez  3-2 Gonzalez  and Ovezov  3-2 Shahbakhsh  are the two that spring to mind but I would need to watch them again to be sure). Obviously I only saw half of a lot of fights and missed some entirely but this was the sense I got. I think the IOC is kind of using the qualifying tournaments to figure out who the bad judges are so hopefully by the Olympics the judging will be closer to competent but obviously using the qualifying tournaments to do this is far from ideal.
     
     
    Anyway this is what I actually wanted to address because the comentators made this mistake too. This statement is sort of true but also not really true at all. In actuality one warning (point deduction) can almost never change the result of a fight. Two and ye you have to win all three rounds for at least 3 judges to win the fight which is obviously pretty devastating but one deduction doesn't really do anything because of how ties are scored. 
     
    So disregarding 10-8s typically the possible scores are 30-27, 29-28, 28-29 and 27-30. If a judge gives all three rounds to the same boxer points deductions can never effect anything (3rd points deduction is a disqualification) so the score changes to 30-26 or 27-29 (30-25 and 27-28 with 2 warnings) not effecting the result at all. If a boxer loses 28-29 and has a points deduction then it just changes to 27-29 and again no impact on the outcome of the fight. The confusing one is when a boxer wins two rounds and has a points deduction in which the score does indeed change to 28-28 but whats crucial here is the rules regarding tied scorecards.
     
    I don't think this is widely understood very well but the rule regarding tied scores is if the judges who have it tied can effect the outcome, then they go back to those judges and they pick a winner. Basically if the tied scores matter the relevant judges pick a winner and as such you can never end a fight with the score being 2-0, 2-1 or 1-0. 
     
    I'll use an actual example to explain this. So lets look at one of today's 57kg fights Carlo Paalam  vs Andrey Bonilla . This fight ended 3-1 to Paalam after Bonilla got a point deduction for what was basically a body slam. (Paalam seemed to hurt his shoulder so hopefully he is ok) (Also its a while since I have seen a boxer as dirty as Bonilla. Would not want to have to box him.) So the judges scores ended up being 29-27 (29-28), 29-27 (29-28), 27-29 (27-30), 28-28 (28-29), 29-27 (29-28) (score with no deduction in brackets) where judges 1,2 and 5 had Paalam winning two rounds and losing one. Judge 3 having Bonilla winning all three and judge 4 having Bonilla winning 2 and losing one round. With the points deduction obviously meaning that judge 4's score was tied. All the other judges results were unaffected by the deduction. Because judge 4's score couldn't change the outcome of the fight his scorecard was simply left as a tie. If he was asked he almost certainly would have given Bonilla the fight given that he gave him 2 rounds and Paalam only one but that would still only make the score 3-2 so it is just left as a tie and the fight's score is 3-1.
     
    If for example one more judge went in favour of Bonilla the scores in the Paalam Bonilla fight would therfore be 29-27, 29-27, 27-29, 28-28, 28-28. This fight would not end 2-1 in favour of Paalam. The two tied scores, in this hypothethical case judge 4 and 5, could cumalatively change the winner of the fight so they go back to judge 4 and 5 and they both pick a winner. Again, crucially for a fight to be 28-28 the boxer who received a points deduction has to have won two rounds for that judge and therefore that judge logically would almost always pick that boxer to win. In this scenario the score with a points deduction would be 2-3 in favour of Bonilla assuming judge 4 and 5 are logical and if the points deduction never happened the score would also be 2-3 in favour of Bonilla.
     
    To emphasize this any fight where with tied scores the fight initially is scored 2-0, 2-1 or 1-0 the tied judges choose a victor and because the only way to have a points deduction and a tied score (not including 10-8 scenarios) is where the boxer who received a deduction won 2 rounds for the tied judge/ judges. Logically one point deduction should never change the outcome of a fight. 
     
    Unfortunately for my argument and the reason I had to caveat everything above with almosts is there are occasionally counter examples and one actually happened today. In the Susan Aguas  vs Marjona Savrieva  fight at W50kg, Savrieva picked up a points deduction in the third round and the scores ended up being 30-26, 29-27, 28-28, 28-28 and 28-28 as a result. As explained above Aguas doesn't win the fight 2-0, the three tied judges could and should have changed the final outcome so judge 3,4 and 5 choose their winner. Judge 3 and 5 of course chose Savrieva having both given her 2 rounds. Whats strange though is on this occasion judge 4 despite giving Savrieva the first 2 rounds and Aguas only the third decided that Aguas won the fight which as I say doesn't really make much logical sense. If judge 4 believed Aguas was that dominant in the third round then that round should have been scored 10-8 by said judge. I think I have only ever seen this scenario of illogical tied decisions happen once or twice.
     
    Apologies for probably overexplaining this a bit but it is quite counterintuitive and the morale of the story is barring stupidity or a second non standard score ( second points deduction/ 10-8 round) one solitary warning despite seemingly changing the scores a lot should never change the ultimate outcome of a fight.
     
    Just finally there is funny quirk of this system where if you win a fight for 3 judges and 2 have it tied (be it a points deduction or a 10-8 round) you would win a split decision 3-0. However if you win a fight for just 1/2 judges and the other 3/4 have it tied. The tied judges are then evaluated again and if they all give you the fight you would then win a unanimous decision 5-0.
    Obviously this doesn't effect the result or anything but I just think its funny that potentially winning one less round for 1/2 judges in rare cases can actually turn a split decision win into a unanimous win.
    This happened in the Maud Van der Toorn  vs Jennifer Fernadez  fight where after Van der Toorn had a points deduction 1 judge had her winning (having given her all three rounds) and the other 4 judges had it tied but having given her 2 rounds gave her the fight. If she had convinced two more judges to give her all 3 rounds (Not that she deserved 3 rounds, Fernandez deservedly won round 2) she would have the fight 3-0 and it would have been a split decision and not a unanimous one.
  19. Like
    Ogreman got a reaction from konig in Boxing IOC Olympic Qualifier 1 2024   
    I mostly agree that the current scoring system doesn't work effectively. For me I would just change the default score for a round to 10-8 and then only close rounds be scored 10-9 and one sided rounds 10-7 rather than the current system where unless you batter the shit out of someone for three minutes straight, the score will be 10-9. This would obviously deviate from pro boxing and make the sytem more complex and being simple to understand is the primary logic behind the current scoring system but I think it would make fights more interesting and should make judging decisions more accurate
     
    Yes, the judges here are just bad, but there were only probably a couple of decisions they actually got wrong today though (Csemez  3-2 Gonzalez  and Ovezov  3-2 Shahbakhsh  are the two that spring to mind but I would need to watch them again to be sure). Obviously I only saw half of a lot of fights and missed some entirely but this was the sense I got. I think the IOC is kind of using the qualifying tournaments to figure out who the bad judges are so hopefully by the Olympics the judging will be closer to competent but obviously using the qualifying tournaments to do this is far from ideal.
     
     
    Anyway this is what I actually wanted to address because the comentators made this mistake too. This statement is sort of true but also not really true at all. In actuality one warning (point deduction) can almost never change the result of a fight. Two and ye you have to win all three rounds for at least 3 judges to win the fight which is obviously pretty devastating but one deduction doesn't really do anything because of how ties are scored. 
     
    So disregarding 10-8s typically the possible scores are 30-27, 29-28, 28-29 and 27-30. If a judge gives all three rounds to the same boxer points deductions can never effect anything (3rd points deduction is a disqualification) so the score changes to 30-26 or 27-29 (30-25 and 27-28 with 2 warnings) not effecting the result at all. If a boxer loses 28-29 and has a points deduction then it just changes to 27-29 and again no impact on the outcome of the fight. The confusing one is when a boxer wins two rounds and has a points deduction in which the score does indeed change to 28-28 but whats crucial here is the rules regarding tied scorecards.
     
    I don't think this is widely understood very well but the rule regarding tied scores is if the judges who have it tied can effect the outcome, then they go back to those judges and they pick a winner. Basically if the tied scores matter the relevant judges pick a winner and as such you can never end a fight with the score being 2-0, 2-1 or 1-0. 
     
    I'll use an actual example to explain this. So lets look at one of today's 57kg fights Carlo Paalam  vs Andrey Bonilla . This fight ended 3-1 to Paalam after Bonilla got a point deduction for what was basically a body slam. (Paalam seemed to hurt his shoulder so hopefully he is ok) (Also its a while since I have seen a boxer as dirty as Bonilla. Would not want to have to box him.) So the judges scores ended up being 29-27 (29-28), 29-27 (29-28), 27-29 (27-30), 28-28 (28-29), 29-27 (29-28) (score with no deduction in brackets) where judges 1,2 and 5 had Paalam winning two rounds and losing one. Judge 3 having Bonilla winning all three and judge 4 having Bonilla winning 2 and losing one round. With the points deduction obviously meaning that judge 4's score was tied. All the other judges results were unaffected by the deduction. Because judge 4's score couldn't change the outcome of the fight his scorecard was simply left as a tie. If he was asked he almost certainly would have given Bonilla the fight given that he gave him 2 rounds and Paalam only one but that would still only make the score 3-2 so it is just left as a tie and the fight's score is 3-1.
     
    If for example one more judge went in favour of Bonilla the scores in the Paalam Bonilla fight would therfore be 29-27, 29-27, 27-29, 28-28, 28-28. This fight would not end 2-1 in favour of Paalam. The two tied scores, in this hypothethical case judge 4 and 5, could cumalatively change the winner of the fight so they go back to judge 4 and 5 and they both pick a winner. Again, crucially for a fight to be 28-28 the boxer who received a points deduction has to have won two rounds for that judge and therefore that judge logically would almost always pick that boxer to win. In this scenario the score with a points deduction would be 2-3 in favour of Bonilla assuming judge 4 and 5 are logical and if the points deduction never happened the score would also be 2-3 in favour of Bonilla.
     
    To emphasize this any fight where with tied scores the fight initially is scored 2-0, 2-1 or 1-0 the tied judges choose a victor and because the only way to have a points deduction and a tied score (not including 10-8 scenarios) is where the boxer who received a deduction won 2 rounds for the tied judge/ judges. Logically one point deduction should never change the outcome of a fight. 
     
    Unfortunately for my argument and the reason I had to caveat everything above with almosts is there are occasionally counter examples and one actually happened today. In the Susan Aguas  vs Marjona Savrieva  fight at W50kg, Savrieva picked up a points deduction in the third round and the scores ended up being 30-26, 29-27, 28-28, 28-28 and 28-28 as a result. As explained above Aguas doesn't win the fight 2-0, the three tied judges could and should have changed the final outcome so judge 3,4 and 5 choose their winner. Judge 3 and 5 of course chose Savrieva having both given her 2 rounds. Whats strange though is on this occasion judge 4 despite giving Savrieva the first 2 rounds and Aguas only the third decided that Aguas won the fight which as I say doesn't really make much logical sense. If judge 4 believed Aguas was that dominant in the third round then that round should have been scored 10-8 by said judge. I think I have only ever seen this scenario of illogical tied decisions happen once or twice.
     
    Apologies for probably overexplaining this a bit but it is quite counterintuitive and the morale of the story is barring stupidity or a second non standard score ( second points deduction/ 10-8 round) one solitary warning despite seemingly changing the scores a lot should never change the ultimate outcome of a fight.
     
    Just finally there is funny quirk of this system where if you win a fight for 3 judges and 2 have it tied (be it a points deduction or a 10-8 round) you would win a split decision 3-0. However if you win a fight for just 1/2 judges and the other 3/4 have it tied. The tied judges are then evaluated again and if they all give you the fight you would then win a unanimous decision 5-0.
    Obviously this doesn't effect the result or anything but I just think its funny that potentially winning one less round for 1/2 judges in rare cases can actually turn a split decision win into a unanimous win.
    This happened in the Maud Van der Toorn  vs Jennifer Fernadez  fight where after Van der Toorn had a points deduction 1 judge had her winning (having given her all three rounds) and the other 4 judges had it tied but having given her 2 rounds gave her the fight. If she had convinced two more judges to give her all 3 rounds (Not that she deserved 3 rounds, Fernandez deservedly won round 2) she would have the fight 3-0 and it would have been a split decision and not a unanimous one.
  20. Love
    Ogreman reacted to Rafa Maciel in Boxing IOC Olympic Qualifier 1 2024   
    Probably my last results of the tournament:
     
    Men's 71Kg -  Christos Karaitis def.  Ladislav Horvath 
     
    Men's 92Kg -  Mateusz Bereznicki def.  Joseph Kostur
     
    Men's 92Kg -  Sadam Magomedov def.  Tyron Kofi Amo
     
    Men's 63.5Kg -  Aleksej Sendrik def.  Stelios Kirsanidis
     
     
  21. Like
    Ogreman reacted to Rafa Maciel in Boxing IOC Olympic Qualifier 1 2024   
    My 120th result! Sadly it's a loss for 
     
    Men's 63.5Kg -  Ali Habibinezhad def.  Patris Mughalzai (4-1)
  22. Wow!
    Ogreman reacted to Illya in Boxing IOC Olympic Qualifier 1 2024   
    Zakhareiev is also out 
  23. Haha
    Ogreman reacted to Rafa Maciel in Boxing IOC Olympic Qualifier 1 2024   
    I don't know - result was taken from Kazakh federation instagram page and according to google translate, it was all about defending country's honour. 
  24. Like
    Ogreman got a reaction from Josh in Boxing IOC Olympic Qualifier 1 2024   
    Relax man. You still have Anastasia Kovalchuk and Yurii Zakhareiev who were the boxers who were likely to win a quota in the first place. Sure the draw had opened up for Zamotayev with Molina losing and you have had a couple of dissapointing loses but this tournament is still young. If you end up with 2 quotas thats a good result and how the rest of it went doesn't matter that much. (Zakhareiev does still has a very tough path of course)
  25. Like
    Ogreman got a reaction from avlar in Boxing IOC Olympic Qualifier 1 2024   
    Relax man. You still have Anastasia Kovalchuk and Yurii Zakhareiev who were the boxers who were likely to win a quota in the first place. Sure the draw had opened up for Zamotayev with Molina losing and you have had a couple of dissapointing loses but this tournament is still young. If you end up with 2 quotas thats a good result and how the rest of it went doesn't matter that much. (Zakhareiev does still has a very tough path of course)
×
×
  • Create New...