World Cup 2024

This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Oct 2023
6
13
54
Well that's the thing, nobody seems to know what the ruleset was.

Both Groth and Harimoto thought that only the points won/loss in *their match* mattered. As why would points against someone else matter? So they both played their matches with that assumption. This is why Groth didn't celebrate when announcers thought he had gotten through, and why Harimoto celebrated when he won.

So is it unfair to Groth when both players played under the "most points in the match not the group scenario?" Why is it fair that a random point or two more than a different player should determine which of the two should advance? Also, if both players had the wrong idea about what the rules were for advancing, then either both are dumb or the ITTF did a terrible job of conveying the rules to the players.

Either way the system is dumb to begin with.
I completely agree with you that this point system is simply dumb.
I didn't realize that they were under the assumption that only the points in the direct match would count. I was thinking automatically that the general points win/loss was the criteria of choice, simply because it is what the ITTF was publishing on their website...
That said, I do think that in a format like this the overall win/loss is a better proxy for performance than simply counting points scored (which get inflated by deuces, as you correctly poited out).
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Sep 2013
7,775
6,985
17,052
Read 3 reviews
Both Groth and Harimoto thought that only the points won/loss in *their match* mattered. As why would points against someone else matter? So they both played their matches with that assumption. This is why Groth didn't celebrate when announcers thought he had gotten through, and why Harimoto celebrated when he won.

So is it unfair to Groth when both players played under the "most points in the match not the group scenario?"
Groth had more points in that match against Harimoto. 35 vs 33
So, that answers your question - it is NOT that haha
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Sep 2013
7,775
6,985
17,052
Read 3 reviews
I completely agree with you that this point system is simply dumb.
I didn't realize that they were under the assumption that only the points in the direct match would count. I was thinking automatically that the general points win/loss was the criteria of choice, simply because it is what the ITTF was publishing on their website...
That said, I do think that in a format like this the overall win/loss is a better proxy for performance than simply counting points scored (which get inflated by deuces, as you correctly poited out).
if you read Groth's post,
the image shows him having a 1.18 PWL and Harimoto only a 1.14, so Groth was placed number 1.
based on rules, PWL is correct and 1.18 is correct
somehow, someone, somewhere changed the rules around 1.5 hours after Groth was told he was number 1
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Sep 2013
7,775
6,985
17,052
Read 3 reviews
1713343930187.png

based on this
both players have 2 match points each, so tied again.
then we move over to ratio of wins in points, of which Groth does have the higher ratio too (35 to 33).
so, now matter how I read it with my poor English skills, I can't see how ITTF made Groth second place, other than "max points in the group" by Harimoto
 
  • Like
Reactions: kindof99
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Active Member
Aug 2023
509
190
1,128
View attachment 29373
based on this
both players have 2 match points each, so tied again.
then we move over to ratio of wins in points, of which Groth does have the higher ratio too (35 to 33).
so, now matter how I read it with my poor English skills, I can't see how ITTF made Groth second place, other than "max points in the group" by Harimoto
Harimoto had 35 not Groth. Harimoto had more points in their match
 
  • Like
Reactions: kindof99
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Nov 2022
1,166
1,575
4,312
View attachment 29373
based on this
both players have 2 match points each, so tied again.
then we move over to ratio of wins in points, of which Groth does have the higher ratio too (35 to 33).
so, now matter how I read it with my poor English skills, I can't see how ITTF made Groth second place, other than "max points in the group" by Harimoto
Wait, wasn't the final score:

Harimoto T.
7
6
11
11


Groth J.
11
11
6
5

?

So that's Harimoto 35 vs Groth 33. Which site are you reading your results?

Why would Groth think he lost then?
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Active Member
Feb 2019
609
615
2,010
ITTF/WTT should just admit they can't do math/administration/PR and keep things simple. I'm all for innovation, but this could have been easily prevented by sticking to the rules or going by game ratios only and implementing a sudden death game like T-League's victory match in event of a tie. But of course those officials will always find a way to screw things over.
 
says Shoo...nothing to see here. - zeio
says Shoo...nothing to see here. - zeio
Well-Known Member
Jan 2018
7,542
9,529
18,874
ITTF/WTT should just admit they can't do math/administration/PR and keep things simple. I'm all for innovation, but this could have been easily prevented by sticking to the rules or going by game ratios only and implementing a sudden death game like T-League's victory match in event of a tie. But of course those officials will always find a way to screw things over.
Too innovative for their own good.

https://www.tabletennisdaily.com/fo...-game-changing-announcement.18145/post-237010
TL;DR
The World Tour is now a separate vehicle to slip in rule changes under the disguise of Diamond Tier on the pretext of professionalization, using prize money and stardom as bait to get players to embrace the said changes.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Nov 2022
1,166
1,575
4,312
Man, we already had the answer from ITTF, what a shame
View attachment 29374
It's the least unfair system, and the one that both players competed under the assumption of. So I guess they got it right eventually.

Still, the shame here is that they were so incompetent that they conveyed the wrong info to both players. That caused Harimoto to go from relieved elation to crying on the bench. And it confused the hell out of Groth who thought he lost, then thought he was going to be competing in Ro16, only to find out later that it was a mistake.

Unbelievable fuckup by them.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Member
Apr 2024
18
31
73
44
Well Moregard tried to do that but then the ref gave him a warning. So I guess you're not allowed to.

Professionals also have to worry about their health and remain injury free. Them getting paid for an exhibition match is one thing, but why risk their livelihood when there are no stakes remaining?
Who said about risking? I wouldn't mind if he were more relaxed, or more conservative in his play. I only minded his contemptous behaviour. And I think it is what he was scolded for, not for showmanship. After all, there was no showmanship before he got his first 'mind your behaviour'. There even seems to have been some silly question on his part to which the umpire answered 'no'. This I can't hear properly, but after it Assar asked him to show the best of himself, so it must have been something silly.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kindof99
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
Oct 2014
12,928
18,619
46,714
Read 17 reviews
It makes sense in soccer/football since who knows how deep into extra time a match can go without a score. Penalty kicks are just coinflipping with the illusion of some agency.

But what's the point of this system in table tennis? There were a lot of 4-0 wins which means an extra game was played when it wasn't really necessary. Then you have the utter silliness of playing meaningless games like we saw all of today. I think the ref warned Moregard about behavior simply because he was going for trickshots and turning it into an exhibition. Instead he just dumped balls into the net and served off the table to get it over with.

Whoever came up with this idea clearly didn't think it through deeply enough.
The main point of this idea in TT is predictable scheduling. They went through a lot of matches without being significantly late. If they implemented Golden point, that would help as well to get through matches on a faster timeline.
 
This user has no status.
This user has no status.
Well-Known Member
May 2011
1,314
1,445
3,501
The point of a Match should be to win the match, not to win every Single set.

It favors some players more than others.
A Player like Dima, would be in a disadvantage as he usually takes time to fire up.
Timo usually also plays better in longer matches as he Reserves his energy and doesnt play an all out risky attacking game.

But with all these younger, modern Standard 3rd Ball Attackers where outside the top 15 there is rarely any stylistic differences, these Kind of "upsets" and inconsitencies can happen.
Well, the point of a match is what the rules of the match says, but I agree these rules are really stupid.
 
  • Like
Reactions: kindof99
Top