USA Olympic selection process change

NextLevel · Mar 14, 2019

Loopadoop said:
Kanak Jha, December 2018, lost to an up and coming Iranian player under 18. He had no ITTF World Tour Ranking then of the 1200 listed.

Not sure what the point is. If Iran is fielding an opponent who is unranked, what does that have to do with US Olympic selection policy? Maybe you recommend Kanak should use long pips?

Loopadoop · Mar 14, 2019

In full competition for qualifying, Kanak Jha could be upset, by a trained kid just coming into his own skill wise.

NextLevel · Mar 14, 2019

Loopadoop said:
In full competition for qualifying, Kanak Jha could be upset, by a trained kid just coming into his own skill wise.

Which is exactly why you don't use such procedures to select the team.

Loopadoop · Mar 16, 2019

NextLevel said:
Which is exactly why you don't use such procedures to select the team.

So you think player seniority is more important than competition ?

NextLevel · Mar 16, 2019

Loopadoop said:
So you think player seniority is more important than competition ?

No I think results gained over a long period of time are a better indication of player quality than results in one match or event. Judgement of course is allowed to bear on the results so a smart coach can balance all the available information.

Loopadoop · Mar 16, 2019

NextLevel said:
No I think results gained over a long period of time are a better indication of player quality than results in one match or event. Judgement of course is allowed to bear on the results so a smart coach can balance all the available information.

So in essence you're saying, prior results by a player give him seniority status over the competition even if he loses.

So you want to give a coach sponsored by a manufacturer the discretion to pick a player sponsored by the same manufacturer over a competitor he lost to.

....

NextLevel · Mar 16, 2019

Loopadoop said:
So in essence you're saying, prior results by a player give him seniority status over the competition even if he loses.

So you want to give a coach sponsored by a manufacturer the discretion to pick a player sponsored by the same manufacturer over a competitor he lost to.

....

No, I am saying that one match result does not make a player better than another player who has a better record over a longer period of time. And if the fear is that a coach will have a manufacturer bias, then sure, hiring a corrupt or biased coach is a problem. It doesn't mean that there is no wisdom in given coaches selection discretion. Obviously a good coach will consider all the relevant results.

Again remember in China, only one spot was determined by trials. The rest were coach's selections based on various factors, including trials performance and performance over the previous year.

Loopadoop · Mar 16, 2019

NextLevel said:
No, I am saying that one match result does not make a player better than another player who has a better record over a longer period of time. And if the fear is that a coach will have a manufacturer bias, then sure, hiring a corrupt or biased coach is a problem. It doesn't mean that there is no wisdom in given coaches selection discretion. Obviously a good coach will consider all the relevant results.

Again remember in China, only one spot was determined by trials. The rest were coach's selections based on various factors, including trials performance and performance over the previous year.

You're talking idealistic about coaches, I don't think the real world usually operates that way.

The current USA Hpd and Kanak Jha, I think are sponsored by the same manufacturer.

China is unique and different, since their team trains together at one facility with coaches, while the USA players do not. We also don't know how much they use the team concept in pro tour events during the final rounds between their players to influence the individual world rankings.

NextLevel · Mar 16, 2019

Loopadoop said:
You're talking idealistic about coaches, I don't think the real world usually operates that way.

The current USA Hpd and Kanak Jha, I think are sponsored by the same manufacturer.

China is unique and different, since their team trains together at one facility with coaches, while the USA players do not. We also don't know how much they use the team concept in pro tour events during the final rounds between their players to influence the individual world rankings.

People can definitely be corrupt, the question is whether that means that trials are always the best or fairest way to select the best players. I think the idea that the best player by far and away is being selected because the national coach is sponsored by the same equipment manufacturer is ludicrous. And we can all make up things about China.

Loopadoop · Mar 16, 2019

NextLevel said:
People can definitely be corrupt, the question is whether that means that trials are always the best or fairest way to select the best players. I think the idea that the best player by far and away is being selected because the national coach is sponsored by the same equipment manufacturer is ludicrous. And we can all make up things about China.

I didn't say Jha would be selected by that coincidence.

There are other players sponsored by the same manufacturer as the Hpd. Do you think he could be influenced to pick their players over a player sponsored by another manufacturer ?

China info is facts, the team concept use has had some reported in the media in the past.

Loopadoop · Aug 14, 2019

Pan American Games Upset

USA WR 33 Kanak Jha 2-4 Wu Juaji Dominican Republic WR 648

Politics should not be part of the selection process.

The USA currently has 30 players world ranked from 218 - 1268. Several of them have been ranked better than 648 when they were more active in ranking tournaments.

http://results.ittf.link/index.php?option=com_fabrik&view=list&listid=69&Itemid=206

....

Loopadoop · Aug 14, 2019

30 USA players
World Ranked 218-1268

http://results.ittf.link/index.php?option=com_fabrik&view=list&listid=69&Itemid=206

Search

Search

USA Olympic selection process change

NextLevel

NextLevel

Well-Known Member

Loopadoop

Loopadoop

Well-Known Member

NextLevel

NextLevel

Well-Known Member

Loopadoop

Loopadoop

Well-Known Member

NextLevel

NextLevel

Well-Known Member

Loopadoop

Loopadoop

Well-Known Member

NextLevel

NextLevel

Well-Known Member

Loopadoop

Loopadoop

Well-Known Member

NextLevel

NextLevel

Well-Known Member

Loopadoop

Loopadoop

Well-Known Member

Loopadoop

Loopadoop

Well-Known Member

Loopadoop

Loopadoop

Well-Known Member

Similar threads