JoshMartini007

They're not currently listed according to IJF, but I imagine things might slightly change between now and when the ranking close.

With the rankings coming to a close next week I wanted to take a look at the tripartite situations. Here's a list of the highest point total from eligible NOCs which are not qualified through the rankings or continental quotas. -804 - 769 - 481 - 294 - 235 - 234 - 206 - 201 - 138 - 133 - 128 - 128 - 118 - 110 - 86 --------Top 15------ - 84 - 64 - 60 - 58 - 54 - 44 - 33 - 31 - 25 - 19 - 17 (not sure if they got a tripartite quota or will be given an IOC quota) - 13 - 10 - 6 - 6 - 6 - 6 Note, the tripartite committee takes multiple things into account and won't necessarily just take the top 15. Of course, having more points will make it more likely to be granted the quotas, but I've also seen athletes with no points being given a quota.

I always thought it was weird New Zealand declined the women's quota without declining the men's quota, especially since the woman was a relatively better archer. I guess they wanted to give him a chance. Obviously Tonga won't make the MQS, but World Archery does have the ability to make exceptions. We'll see what happens

Weightlifting is weirder. You can host it anywhere.

I've also removed as the IOC announced they will compete in athletics, cycling, judo and swimming.

Here are the women's tripartite quotas: Women's 10m air rifle - and (reallocation from 50m rifle) Women's 50m rifle 3 positions - None Women's 10m air pistol - Women's 25m air pistol - reallocated to Women's trap - reallocated to Women's skeet - reallocated to

Not sure if these are tripartite quotas, they almost look to be IOC quotas, similar to refugees

Technically, she can qualify, but then Great Britain will have to decline one of the quotas

Once the World Rankings are finalized I think Great Britain will have five options. Do you know if there's a selection criteria or will they go with the top 2 ranked?

That would be incredibly heart breaking. Though if it happens, we can't complain too much after our men's team essentially qualified by getting so lucky.

Quotas are for the athlete, but should a nation qualify more than two athletes, the NOC can select which two athletes will compete.

Many are probably just parroting other posts without doing the math. As for the original posts, maybe they forgot that the Netherlands also loses points in addition to Canada gaining points or they probably saw Canada being down ~18 points and think the gap is too large. Or maybe they just wanted to create suspense (more clicks/interactions).

Less than 3 points separate the two nations, pretty much win and you're in (unless they choke against / )

It's pretty dumb. The process only benefits large nations. It pretty much cost a spot at the Olympics a few games ago.

As a reminder, the athlete needs to finish in the top 3 in order to qualify. If the quota isn't awarded it will then be reallocated to the World Rankings.

Essentially, name branding will attract more people to watch.

If anyone wants a start, look at Totallympics' Medal Tracker from previous World Championships. Obviously some sports will need to be adjusted (particularly swimming since many athletes skipped 2024 Worlds), but it's a good place to get a ballpark range.

20-25 medals

They don't need to, but it would be very helpful, especially if we only win 3-2 against the Netherlands. The Netherlands match is still the most critical. There isn't really a path to qualification if we lose.

Typically the sum of athletes competing in the respective synchro and individual event should be 34. It gets a bit complicated when a diver competes in both the 3m and 10m events, World Aquatics becomes inconsistent when that happens.

likely needs to beat 3-1 to overtake them. 3-2 is still possible, but we will need to win by better scores than the Netherlands in our other two games.

As with other sports, I imagine they will treat AIN as separate for Russia and Belarus. I also imagine they will be exempt for Davis/BJK Cup requirements (pick one from: strength of nation, newcomer to rankings or historical participation. Or maybe they will just say this was a special case since the team is banned, but not the individual athletes).

For tennis players, there isn't much of an upside in competing at the Olympics. No prize money, no ranking points, not a prestigious title and you risk injury. Representing your nation is pretty much all it has going for it, though to be fair that alone is quite the draw.

I was kind of hoping they would just give him the tripartite quota like they did for Cara Black back in 2008.

It took a while for the picture to load so I was surprised to see the coach (I assume) as the main photo. Other nations tend to use the players in the photo