Lose to advance? Why is the table tennis team competition system so strange

Mondo Sports Updated on 2024-03-07

InTable tennisIn the competition, the current popular team competition format is to use a "4-2-1-0" point system. While this format motivates players to win, it has also sparked some controversy. This article will reveal the loopholes and problems in this strange competition system, and call on the organizers to be more rigorous when formulating the competition system, so as not to affect the fairness and fairness of the competitionSportsSpirit.

Table tennisIn the team competition, the distribution of points between the winners and losers has always been the focus of attention. The previous format was 2 points for the winner, 1 point for the loser, and 0 points for the forfeit. However, in the recently heldNational GamesIn the mass group, a new format has emerged, which is "4-2-1-0". The original idea of this format was to encourage players to strive for victory as much as possible, even if they were behind. However, research has revealed that the format has serious math holes that can lead to players losing deliberately.

The team competition isTable tennisAn important event in the competition, where players compete in the form of teams. In order to make the game more enjoyable and competitive, the format needs to be designed with multiple aspects in mind. In this new format, the winner gets more points, which makes the outcome of the match even more important, and players are no longer satisfied with just winning, but also fighting for more rounds and points. This not only increases the suspense of the game, but also increases the competitive motivation of the players.

In the traditionalTable tennisIn the case of a three-player tie-score lap, the win-loss relationship between the three-man with the same score will be calculated first, and then ranked according to the winning ratio and the small score ratio. Some athletes take advantage of this rule and deliberately play tacit balls in order to gain more points. However, this is the case among othersSportsProjects are also often present, not limited to:Table tennisRace. This shows that the limitations of the rules are universal, but the limitations of such rules are limited, because the deliberately losing side will not only make a profit, but also make other players profit, and they will not suffer losses either.

Table tennisTournamentPoints systemIt plays an important role in determining the outcome of the match. In the traditionalPoints system, the winner is worth 2 points and the loser is worth 1 point. This system is a good way to reflect the strength and performance of the players, and it also encourages both sides to go all out to win. However, the new 4-2-1-0 format has some problems while emphasizing the points advantage of the winners. If a player deliberately loses in order to gain more points, this is not compliantSportsspirit and the principle of fair competition may cause controversy and questioning.

In some exceptional cases, a player must deliberately lose in order to achieve a higher position. In this case, a normal win will put yourself or your team in the face of elimination. toNational GamesIn the mass women's team competition, for example, the Henan team drew with the Hebei team in the group stageLocomotiveThe sports association has formed a situation of the same sub-ring. In the final round of the game, the Henan team has a 3:1 leadLocomotiveteam, if Guo Peiqiu wins the last set, Henan team will get 3 points, andLocomotiveTeams can only earn 1 point. However, if Guo Peiqiu loses to his opponent,LocomotiveThe teams will get one more point, resulting in three teams having the same number of points. In this case, depending on the win-loss ratio, Henan may have to give up winning to improve their ranking.

The problem with the 4-2-1-0 format is that the winner has the flexibility to control the loser's points in order to get a better position. This kind of "flexibility" may lead to players deliberately losing to profit, and even the strange result of "losing to qualify, winning but being eliminated". In order to avoid this from happening, the format should be designed with the principles of fairness and competition in mind, and avoid giving players the opportunity to lose intentionally.

1. Restore the points system to the traditional 2-point system to maintain the principle of fairness and competition.

2.When calculating the ranking of teams with the same score, in addition to the win-loss relationship and the win-game ratio, more factors can be considered, such as goal difference, etc., to make the ranking more fair.

3.Strengthen referees and supervision to prevent players from deliberately losing or taking advantage of loopholes in the rules to obtain improper benefits.

While the 4-2-1-0 format motivates players to win, it also raises some questions. The loophole in this format is that the winner can control the points of the loser, which can lead to players deliberately losing in order to get a higher position. In order to maintain the fairness of the competition and the principle of competition, the organizer should formulate the rules and regulations of the competition more rigorously to avoid the occurrence of such disputes.

Comments:

1. Unreasonable! 3:2 wins and 4:1 wins with 3 points are the biggest problem. If it is the 54321 system, it will not be able to exploit the loophole. Specifically, the 5:0 winner gets 5 points, the loser gets 0 points, the 4:1 winner gets 4 points, the loser gets 1 point, the 3:2 winner gets 3 points, and the loser gets 2 points. --Eight-tailed Poor Discharge 7e20

2. Why is this strange situation happening? The original sin is: there are points for losing! Some rule-makers are so good at math that they elevate the scores that should be applied to the same ranking as wins and losses to the same status as winning and losing. --Cheetah Blue Eagle.

3. There should be 5 points for a 5-0 win, 4 points for a 4-1 win, and 3 points for a 3-2 win, so that there will be no problem - Xu Xiaoming's tomorrow.

Related Pages